The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1883-04-04
ooUars. COUNSEL AND JURORS.


Jeter and Logue, have been on trial in the
Criminal Court of Marion County for muir
der. In one case, that OF Jetsr, the Jury
in the other, that of Logue. the
Jury found the defendant guilty of man
slaughter, and sentenced him to the Peni-
Tertiary for three years. Now, then, 1t
seems to be in order in the estimation of one
of our esteemed contemporaries to make
such comments upon the trial ss would, il
its hypercriticisms were to have the effect
desired, bring indianapolis Courts oil
justice. indianapolis jurors and Indianapo-
lis lawyers not only into disrepute, but sink
them altogether to degraded level scarcely
above that occupied by the most debased
classes of society. The first purpose OF those
responsible for the trial of criminals is to OBJ
tain an honest, upright Jury. To say that is
not the purpose directly or by innuendos is
to charge such officials with corruption the
most hagitious, purpose to use their
power and authority TO defeat the ends oi
Justice, aid criminals rather than punish
them, and TO disregard the welfare oi
society rather than promote it. We are not
ready 10 join in that sort of crusade against
Courts and Juries. 1t is downright inssr
ity. Il warps and distOrts facts. 1t bring.
the safeguard of society into disrepute. II
encourages mob violence, because it insinu
ates or directly assumes, that The constituted
authorities and the proceedings Of Courts in
all regards, within the secure provisions Of
the law, can not be trusted. It is an arrsign
ment of men, acting under the binding obi
cations of their oaths, and intimating thai
ignorance or cupidity, mental or moral
weakness has led Juries to disagree or tc
render verdicts violative of law
and testimony. II communitie;
can once be brought TO adopt such views
anarchy will prevail unless it is put down
by Military Courts, backed by bsyonets.
1t becomes, in this connection, matter
of profound surprise that attorneys at Law
who defend men charged with crime should
become targets for filings and jeers based
upon their success in practicing their PROBES
sion. The law recognizes the rights of men
charged with crime, and the est criminal
whose neck was ever broken by the fiat OF
bar of justice clothed with the pre-
roga.ive to claim and demand every right
under the law which ITS majesty confers, the
equal in that relation of any other man in
the State Indeed, so sacred are these rights
esteemed by the Law that if the man ar
rigned for crime is so poor that he can no,
fee a lawyer to defend him. the Courts assign
him counsel TO guard his rights and see that
justice is done; and his lawyer is bound by
mis- oath and by every consideration OF
honor. to make the best defense possible for
his client, and any lawyer who does less
than this, betrays his trust and is disgrace
to his profession. 1t is maxim
of the law, that il vera better for ninety
nine guilty men to go free than that one In
nocent man should suffer, and yet, notwitb-
every possible effort to snalyze
testimony and guard the rights OF men &C
cused of crime, the innocent are made to
suffer In prisonment and death. To arraign
counsel for earnest devotion TO their clients
to intimate that their regulations are to
be smirched in any degree by the crimes
charged upon those they defend. is not only
a base prostitution of journalism, but a
covert plea for universal conviction,
regardless of law aud testimony,
and an exhibition of a willingness
to see criminal trials reduced TO a farce in
which conviction shall result. 1t must be
understood that Courts are not instituted to
convict, but to see that Justice is done.
Courts are human, and therefore falllble. The
wicked do sometimes escape and the innocent
are sometimes punished, but these are
the exceptions. To determine the measure
of guilt, or whether guilt exists at all, are
often questions which battle human wisdom.
And Just here comes in another wise prOVi-
sion: the man indicted for wrong
doing is to have always the
benefit of the doabt. II will not
do to tear away all the safeguards which
centuries of experience have built up for
the protection Of society Fanatical war
whoops FOR universal conviction are not the
requirement of the times. Justice and
mercy still have their votarles. and the fun
damental principles OF our Jurisprudence
ought not to be changed. Those who are
forever denouncing Juries and Courts. pro-
pose nothing better TO take their place.
they simply favor tearing dOwn-they never
build. What do they propose in the place
Of the Jury system? nothing. What changes
in the practices OF the Courts? none.
Bat they seem to favor the idea that men
under indictment for crime should always
employ third-rate men TO defend them, so
that their conviction may be assured.
When they pursue different course, as in
the case Of Jeter and Logue. then fanaticism
whets its besk and shsrpsus its claws, and.
with ferceness born of insanity, attacks
counsel, Courts and Juries designedly to
bring the machinery Of justice into disre.
pute. Such journalism IL pernicious. end
such must be the verdict Of all prudent
--------
SOME QUEER THEORIES.
Mr.. John McElroy has s paper In the
April number of the Popular Science