The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1890-07-05
A Righteous Decision.

Judge ROBINSON delivered the opinion
of the Court of Appeals on Tuesday re-
verslng the decision of Judge Stewart
that Mr.. Archer could not be held UNI
der existing laws for the crime of EN-
bezzlement. This decision Of the high
est appellate court of the State is the
first step towards wiping out an unwel-
come stigma upon the administration
of justice in Maryland. Whatever may
be the technical aspects of Mr.. Archer's
case, as lawyers consider it, it is fact
that he has in his official capacity as
State Treasurer, received large amount
of money the property of the people OF
the State, and that he has appropriated
to his own and other uses over one
hundred aud thirty thousand dollars OF
that money. For the purpose of dis
covering the exact uses to which this
large sum stolen by Mr.. Archer from
the treasury of the State had been ap-
piled by him, Committee Of Investi-
CATION was appointed by the Legisla-
tuTe. Without casting any intentional
reproach upon the methods or results
of that investigation, the people of the
State are really very little the wiser for
its ever having met. Enough has been
discovered however to show that Mary
land has been disgraced by careless
and incompetent administration of its
affairs, and if Judge Stewards decision
had stood, no further enlightening (O
fact would probably have reached the
people. Fortunately for the reputation
of Maryland justice. the higher judicial
wisdom of a reviewing court has elevat-
ed existing laws into plane of com
mon sense and reason. This at least
is a matter OF public congratulation,
even should Mr.. Archer through the
ingenuity of skillful counsel finally es-
cape their meshes. No sensible man
desires to see the machinery Of the law
in this State become an Instrument of
vengeance upon those who are unfortu-
nate enough to become amenatle to it.
But Judge Stewards decision whether
technically correct or not-and which
question the Court of Appeals now set
tles-by the violence it did to reason
and common sense and by its impair
ment of the public confidence in the
strict impartillity Of law, had done more
to weaken public respect for the dig
nifty of Maryland jurisprudence than any
recent decision we can recall. In the
light of that decision, it really seemed
that MARYLAND laws had been framed
for the purpose of creating privileged
class of criminals. That they discnmi-
mated in favor of the Influential and
socially prominent criminal, but were
relentless upon the obscure and the
unfortunate. We may thank the Court of
Appeals, therefore, that its reversal of
Judge Stewart's decision has removed
this imputation upon the character OF
our laws. The Lord knows that Mary
land justice is often enough strangled
in her temple by the wondrous wisdom
of that anomalous outgrowth of our
times, the average nineteenth century
Juror, whom the Constitution of Mary
land constitutes the judge of the law
as we'll as the fact in criminal cases.
He often enough causes the angels
to weep by his fantastic tricks in the
jury box. Possibly the people Of Ma
ryland may yet have some tears to shed
when the time shall come tor him to
consider the facts and law in Mr.. Arch.
er's case. For the present, however,
1t is something to know that there is
law in Maryland to meet the case of an
embezzling public official.