Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1875-02-06
TIL COST OF CRIME.
Valuable Suggestions to the General
Assembly by Judge Frazier.
Retrenchment That Would Save an
Immense Sum to Taxpayers.

In the House, yesterday, Br. East pre-
sented The following communication from
Judge Frazier, Judge Of the Davidson
County Criminal Court, which was re-
ferred to the Committee to Revise the
Criminal Laws:
/ am of the opinion that the laws Of this
State, as to the trial and punishment of
crime, might be so changed, modified and
amended, without endangering the liberty
Of the citizen or iniuring any one, as to
better proportion the punishment 10 the
enOrmiby of the Offense, and greatly dimin-
ish the expense Of criminal prosecutions.
"First. 1 would repeal the act Of 1865,
making horse stealing, burglary, robbery
and stealing from the person, capital Of
fences. This act was passed at or shortly
after the close Of the war, and 70 meet the
then existing circumstances, and is not
adapted to the present state OF society.
Its penalties are not reasonably proportion
ate to the crimes specified. Juries will sell
dom infict punishments that they deem
too severe, and many guilty persons are &C
Quilted under this act, from that cause. 1t
| also increases the expeI Sc Of trial by thl
increased number Of peremptoTy challenges
given the defendant. Hence, it should be
| repealed and the old law revived.
1sSecOnd. l would abolish the unmean
ing distinction between petit and grand
larceny, making all stealing larceny of the
| the same grade, and giving the jury the
/ power to commute the punishment Of lar
/ ceny in all cases without regard TO the
amount stolen, at their discretion, to con
finement in the common jail or wOrk-housC
Of the county, for any period Of not les
than six months nor more than three years.
And, wherever so committed, the cost
should be paid by the county, as in misde
meanOrs, whenfrom any Il they are no
obtained from the defendant by his labor
"Third. would diminish the numbei
of peremptory challenges for defendants Z
~twenty-fOur in capital cases, without in
crease as to the number Of parties trieC
Jointly, and eight for the State; in all othe
~feIOnies, twelve for the defendant and fou
for the State; in misdemeanOr cases, five
each for the defendant and the State.
'Fourth. 1 would repeal the law passe'
at the last session allowing parties Jointly
indebted to sever, on demand, and leav,
the law as it was. This act has cost tn.
State thousands of dollars, but has neye
benefited any one.
"ELlu. 1 Moulu pIouADlb JIG lhlpOAIa
ton, sale, use or giving away Of all tn
arms now forbidden to be carried.
"Sixth. l would dispense with the COS
Of keeping juries separate during the tria
of causes, and authorize the courts to dis
perse them, at their discretion, at any ant
all times during the trial, in all cases ex
cept capital ones. Keeping them tOgethe
never does any good, but costs the Stat
immense sums for no reasonable purpose.
Seventh. 1 would reduce the cOmpen
satiOn for jurors summoned on the regular
pannels to one dollar per day, and abolish
| all pay to talesman jurors. The cost Of ju
ries is the greatest item of expense in the
administration of criminal law. The com
pensatiOn ought never TO be such as to b
| sought for as a mOnied business or prOfes
sion as Il is now. If talesman jurors weTt
not paid it would secure a better class o
jurors, Cypress no n and save a lsrgt
amount Of costs.