The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1889-11-13
The Administration Of Justice.

EDITOR The MANNING TINES: We
had the pleasure OF listening to most
able and instructive sermon last Sun
day evening ut the Manning MetLo-
dist church, delivered by your pastor.
While we think the effort an able one,
and promulsative Of much good, yet
the minister's criticisms of the Judi
ciary of our State was, we think, rath-
er severe He said, in substance, that
there was time when our court
houses were temples of justice but
not so now. The juries are corrupt,
because they fail to convict, though
the evidence of the criminals guilt is
conclusive. The judges are corrupt,
because they sign petitions for the
criminals pardon after, perchance, a
verdict Of guilty is rendered and sen
tence passed. The Governors are cor
rnpt, because they grant uncondjtion-
al pardons to criminals adjudged by
their peers to be guilty"
As to the luries. It should be re-
membered that they are sworn to rem
der verdict in accordance with law
and the evidence-heGal erilence-of
each particular case. We know that
guilty men sometimes escape the mesh
es of the law through the jury box,
but when we think of how prone the
human family is to presume the guilt
of one accused of how easily it is to
crush an innocent man OF woman into
the very dust by the circulation of a
damaging report; and how qaickly re-
port ripens into repute, We should not
be surprised if the accused sometimes
thus escape. Certainly it is, for history
and experience have taught us that it
should not be left to the masses, but
to those citizens who are drawn as ju-
rors, to Judge OF the suficienee of the
evidence necessary to assign their
neighbor to the gallows or the peni-
tentiary. And how careful should they
be! for our Divine law teaches us that
'twere better that ninety and nine gull
ty men escape than that one innocent
should suffer; our civil law teaches
that we give to an accused fellow
man the benefit Of all reasonable doubt
of his guilt.
As to the Judges. Our government
is composed of communities commu-
mites Of individuals. The prayers Of
the individuals composing any one Of
these communities, relating t, that
which affects them as an individual
community, should be respected by
those in authority over them, for it is
through them the authority is obtain
ed. A man is tried by the people Of
the community in which a crime is
committed These people select from
among themselves those who are to
pass upon the guilt or innocence of
the accused. The Judge is, generally,
a stranger Now when these Jurors,
and perhaps many others, some Of
whom are high in authority, who rep.
resent that community, petition for
the pardon of one adiudged guilty
solely by their verdict, should not their
prayers receive q ready ear from one
OF their public servants F.? We think so;
and now risk the assertion, that meyer
in South Carolina was a Judge known
to recommend pardon without such
r petition being first pres ented TO hi:n
from the county wherein the offence
was committed. It is, therefore, eyi-
dent that the wrong, if any, is attribu
table to the people, and not to the
Judge, when criminal is pardoned.
The same reasoning is applicable to
the action Of the Goverrorin grantius.
pardons especially as petition
has -gene,Ay- the-at}aitonal recon-
mendation of the solicitor who prose-
cuted the case for the State.
The habit Of granting pardons to
criminals on condition that they leave
tbs State, and thereby rid ourselves Of
the expense Of supporting them by
palminy them off to run at large on
the people of other States, is deserv-
ing of severe criticism bat as that
matter was not touched in the sermon
We will not discuss it here.
L1BERALrrY.