Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1886-12-04
The Richmond Whie has pro.

virginia. IL charges, edlt0rlaily,
that there is one law for the rich
man and another for the poor man
in that state. And what is more to
the point, it proves its charges. 1t
shows that no rich thief has been
convicted since the war, and that at
the same time the penitentiary is
full of poor devils who could not
escape. One of these has served
twenty-one years for stealing a $50
horse, and he has yet fifteen more
years to serve. The Wing is a
Democratic paper, and it's boldness
is not undertaken for political
capital. Nothing but good can re-
suit from its outspoken attacks.
The only regret is that it was not
made sooner.-American.
The Valley Virgimian cites an ex-
ample in the cases of poor man
named Allen, sentenced to the peni-
Tertiary for five years for stealing
$50, and W. r. Smith, of rich re-
lationship, convicted of stealing
$500, 900 as clerk in the Auditors Of
fee, for which he was sentenced to
the penitentiary for taoO gears, but
has not been there a day yet, and is
likely some day to be pardoned by
the governor. 1t suggests another
instance in which a clerk was sent
to the penitentiary for number of
years and his rich superior officer to
the lunatic asylum, both being gull
ty of conspiring to rob the State.
1t is the common experience in
proceedings nowadays everywhere.
Money, rich connections, and polite
al influence save many criminals
from the penitentiary and the gal
lows. The poorer class have no
money to fee lawyers, and no per-
sonal or political influences to move
juries or turn public opinion in their
favor, and they generally pay the
highest pen atty of the law. Courts
sometimes find it necessary to make
" examples" to keep up their judicial
reputation, and some "poor devil''
gets more than the limit of the law.
Nine tenths of the criminal laws
deal with petty offenses and for all
cases there is provision, more so
than for the crimes of embezzlement,
fraud or corruption of a professional
order. The people themselves seem
to condemn more severely the small
er crimes than the greater. Steal a
chicken, or a ham, or some old cloth
ing, or an old horse, and the popu-
lace is in arms, rewards are offered
and supply of post haste shipping
cable procured for the "poor dew
IFS" special convenience; but let
some sharp rascal steal his millions,
-impoverish State, church, parents
or trusts, and he creates a sensation
akin to admiration society
opens its arms, able counsel is pro.
cured, petitions are put in circula-
ton, and it's a poor case if the ends
of justice cannot be defeated. In
moral crimes this line of procedure
is the more frequent. 1t don't pay
to be petty thief; the laws are too
severe and the juries too sure.
Professional rascality commands
higher premium and carries with
it more sympathy, more leniency
and more pardon. If we look around
us most anywhere in public
and social life, do we not see men
who have been guilty of crimes for
which poorer criminals are paying
the penalty. 1t is wealth that Sc
duces with impunity it is the rich
who rob and cast out the widow and
the orphan. Society must be sustain.
ed. The poorer classes have to be kept
down, and taught due respect for
the laws of the land, the customs of
the age and the rights and privileges
which fortune and fashion bestow
True it has always been so, and will
be. The church itself partly draws
these distinctions. At the same
time it is equally true that much Of
the revolutionary spirit of every age
has been due to these social dlstinc.
tions and determinations; and even
now the political and social dissatis-
factions rife in this county arise
from such causes.