Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-02-20
THE RUTLAND HERALD.
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1878
judicial Firmness.

error IN the case VI SUM
rise, as might have been anticipated, 10
q fresh outcry from the metropolitan
press on the delays Of the law and the
miscarriage of justice. A moments
consideration of the subject will, it
seems to us, dispel the glamour which
surrounds these cases and yindicate the
results. The acquittal of Alley, whether
he is guilty or innocent, has no bearing,
whatever, on the existing laws regulat-
ing the punishment of crimes, the adj
ministration of justice, or the ignorance
or Incompetence of jurors. He owes
his present position almost if not entire
" to the same causes that resulted in |
the discharge of Mrs. Wharton and
Schoeppe, namely the inadequacy OF
the scientific evidence, and the ignor-
ance of, so-called, experts. The whole
question Of guilt or innocence turned
upon the question whether certain stains |
found in the prisoners stable were blood |
stains, and If so, whether of man or
horse. The scientific evidence left this
in doubt and Alley received, as he
should, the benefit of that doubt. The
courts and ju1ies of Massachusetts, have
always proved themselves equal to every
emergency, and it has been her proud
boast that criminals receive at their
hands, Judgment or mercy as the law
and evidence requires. Trials, convic-
tlons, sentence and execution have fol-
lowed the murderer without regard to
his or his friends position, wealth,
standing or influence, and unawed and
uninhuenced by popular sympathy or
clamor The acquittal of Alley is but
another illustration of the uprightness
and impartiality of her courts. The
populace demanded his life. The law
and the evidence failed to show his guilt
and he was discharged. The case of
Stokes furnishes another instance of
judicial firmness and integrity. The
united voice of the press and people of
New York demanded his execution in
accordance with his sentence. He was
entitled TO have a fair trial. 1t was the
duty of the courts to see that he had a
fair and impartial trial. 1t is nothing
more or less than we would ask for our
selves. The people were bound to prove
that he was guilty. Every man is and
ought to be presumed, 50 far, certainly,
as judgment, sentence and execution are
concerned innocent until he is proved
guilty. 1t would be a sorry day for
most men if the reverse was the case.
1t would produce the greatest of insecur-
ity, and even anarchy, if the charge OF
crime carried with it the presumption
of guilt; if the mere accusation should
put a man upon his defense. This was
the rule in the old days of despotism,
tyranny and standardization. 1t was q
convenient presumption for kings and
ernperors, who had obnoxious courtiers
and subjects to dispose of. 1t was, how.
ever, dangerous to the liberty and life OF
the individual. Our forefathers, cen
turtles ago, rebelled against the idea,
and wrested from the throne of England
the contrary doctrine that everyone is
to be presumed innocent until he is
proved guilty, and that punishment shall
not be inflicted except after a full, fail
and impartial trial. Well is it for us
and for humanity, that such is the rule
Are we not, however, in danger of for
getting this in our just alarm and indig
nation at the frequency with which thu
gravest of all crimes-murder-is recur
ring, and that so many of the perpetra
tors escape their merited doom? 1t il
at such times that society and indiyid
uals need the upright and impartia
Judge to hold the scales of justice equal,
poised. While we may regret the con
illusions at which Judge Davis arrived
is 1t not, after all, a matter of reiOicin!
that he had the manly courage. tn
moral integrity and judicial frmness t,
decide the question, upon which may
depend the life or death of a fellow i'm
mortal, according to the law as he find
it and as he understands it? Has publi
opinion, or should it have, any effec
upon a simple proposition of law
What has judge to 90 with popula
clamor, or anything else, except th
law and evidence as he finds it produce,
in court before him? To whom are w
to look for the true construction of GU
statutes except to our courts If the.
act corrupty or bow before the storm
of public opinion and the outcry of tn
public press, often driven ON by tn
same public sentiment, what hope hay,
we for pure and impartial administra
tion of justiccf The reasons inducing
the allowance of the writ of error anC
stay Of proceedings are vital to ever,
citizen of New York. If the statute
and decisions of the highest courts o
New York, as Judge Davis says, declar
that "express malice" must be PROVED
and not inferred from the fact of KILN!
under an Indictment charging pre-
meditated design to effect death, a
was the indictment against Stokes, thel
was Judge Boardmans charge wrong
when he told the jury they might infel
malice and generalization from the kill
ing and circumstances of the case. The
effect upon jury must be obvious. The
fault, if any there be, seems to be will
the law-making power, the Legislature
in changing the rule of the common
law. Yet we appeal, year after year
to our legislators to alter, amend anC
repeal the laws as they exist and to en-
act new laws, thus unsettling and dis
turbing our jurisprudence, and ther
vent our indignation upon the courts fol
enforcing the laws as we make them
Let us take our share of the blame, anC
while never failing to spare not the cor
rupt Judge, let us render due honor tc
the upright magistrate who dares exc
cute the law as we have made it for him.
Let US hope that the bench will ALWAYS
be occupied by judges who, like Judge
Davis, although they may ''reach their
conclusions with regret, yet having