St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1879-07-11

deliverance in response to request by
Stokes counsel that he now be dis
charged on his own recognizance.
The causes that led to this strange
verdict can not all be known or stated.
One cause probably was the fact that
the case was the last one for the term,
the jury were tired, in haste to get
home, and did not stop to fairly con-
slider the Importance of the case, or to
weigh the evidence. The fact that the
respondent has lain in Jail for year,
and so had already been punished to
some extent, had its weight with some
of the jury. Before the trial, a respecta-
BILE man stated that no conviction fol
procuring abortion could be had in this
county, because the public sentiment
of the county was in favor OF such
practices; that there would always be
men on the jury who had occasion to
use such men as Stokes. Possibly there
may be something of truth in this state
ment, yet we cannot believe that there
is any public sentiment in our midst
that can for moment tolerate or en-
courage this wicked, degrading, and
abominable crime.
Again, in this case, the course of one
of the respondents lawyers appears
somewhat remarkable to those not
learned in legal ethics. The respond
ent's former partner and present main
supporter, with one of his lawyers,
knowing necessarily that the unfOrtu-
nate girl upon whom Stokes had oper-
ated, would and must be the leading
witness for the state, went to her house
before the trial, induced her to talk the
case over fully with them, and then
both went upon the stand to contradict
the story she told in court Whether
these two witnesses told the truth or
not, of course we can not say, but it
would seem to observers that the duty
of an attorney did not require him to
be travelling about the country to in
terview. or labor with, witnesses in be-
half of the state, and then to step into
the breach and testify himself. If such
is the regular practice of respectable
lawyers, it is practice that would be
called dishOnorable in any other calling
or profession.
One further fact is worthy of notice /:
Some of the jurors, after rendering their
verdict, stated us reason for the verdict,
that in another important case the pres
ent term, they had convicted a re-
spOndent because the evidence proved
him guilty, and that they had been
found fault with for so doing, and that
consequently they had decided that if
the public did not want guilty men
convicted, they would accommodate
the public by acquitting them. Such
a statement does no credit to the
stamina of the juror who made it, but
it illustrates something of human ma
ture.
All people who are friendly to good
order and the due administration of
justice are in good conscience bound to
do nothing that shall encourage crime,
or discourage its due and proper pun
ishment. Though it may seem hard in
some cases, it is better in the end that
justice should take its course. If there
was any reasonable doubt of DR.. Stokes
guilt, he was entitled to the benefit of
that doubt. But if his acquittal is
simply letting loose upon the commu-
nifty a guilty and dangerous criminal,
then a serious wound has been inflicted
upon good morals and public justice.
"The judgments of the Lord are true
and righteous altogether" We should
be glad to believe that the judgments
of our courts are all the same.