The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1873-04-17
JACKSON. Miss March %. 1873

Hon. Robert Lowry, jackson, Mis-:
DEAR SIR In reply to yours OF taf3 date,
in relation 70 the passage of what is usually
known as the Criminal Procedure Bill, at
the last sessions of the Legislature, and
your action in reference to the same, | de
sire to state that my recollection ct the
matter is briefly as follows: The bin which
subsequently became % law, was first intro
duced in the House of Representatives by
Hon. j. X. Mcintosh, OF CLickasaW, and
referred to the Judiciary Committee, Oi
winch l was Chairman. vt the time the
bill was considered in the Committee, OBJ
jections were raised To several OF the pro-
visions embodied therein. among which
were those contained in section I, which
was stricken out. In a discussion of the
merits OF the bill, you held this position.
That in view of the fact that il proposed to
make d radical change in the law a. il then
existed, iii relation 10 proceedings in cases
of for ielture> upon tail bonds and recOgni-
zances, as affecting the liability uf parties
thereto, and of the fact that il had become
a part of the current history OF the country
within the knowledge of almost every one.
that forfeitures heretofore taken against
parties were never collected, but served
merSlY 10 harraSs and annoy those vino hacE
become suretie>-beeides involved the State
in expenses 10 no purpDse-aud OF the fur
ther tact, chat many persons in different
parts OF the state were held 10 answer upon
bonds given 10 military officers, tor otfenscs
charged to have been committed during the
military rule IN violating orders putDprting
to have been Issued, defining olleU~cS un
known to the laws OF the State; aud as the
passage of the bill would prescribe different
rules and mode of procedure ia the Courts
of the State in relation to such tprfeItur"s
as had and would hereafter occur, that uu-
der all the circumstances, it would be best
IN your opinion TO wipe out all old matters,
and in future put all bonds upon the same
footing.
You suggested an amendment to that
effect, and those were the reasons, - far
my memory serves me, assigned by you
for proposing il. This amendment was
agreed 70, and as Chairman Of the Commit
tee, was requested. upon your suggestion,
TO draft anu report it to the House with the
original bill.
The proposition thus became a proof Of
the Act as contained in section 0 and 10 As
published. | presume IT, is needle-- 10 add
that an amendment 70 4 bill is never re-
ported from committee unless it has been
concurred in by a majority Of a quorum
present, and in this instance / remember of
no objection being made.
The original bill a thus amended was
subsequently reported to the House on the
day preceding the adjournment OF the
Legislature, and passed with little or no op-
position-so little in fact that lt made no
Impression on my mind at the time. II was
afterwards reported to the Senate and pass
ed to its third reading on the same day un-
der suspension OF the constitutional Two
thirds rule, and became law on the last
day of the session.
In answer to an inquiry from you on The
day of the adjGurnm ent as 70 the status OF
the bill, | informed you that it had been APP
proved by the Governor, aud had become
law reported from the committee, Dr."
other amendments being made. Subsequent
to the day of adjournment OF the Legisla-
ture | never heard you allude to the Act
but once, on which occasion its provisions
were discussed casually by Us in jackson IN
the presence of the Attorney General. |
also state that measure alluded to. together
with the amendment proposed thereto, iu
the connection in which it was presented
met with my approval, and received my
support.
I am, very respectfully. etc.
W j "