The morning call., 1894-07-05
THE DUTY OF LAWYERS.

The special jury summoned to try the
issue whether the assassin of Mayor Har-
rison of Chicago is Insane have found
verdict that he is mot insane nor a luna
tic" His execution is fixed for July 13,
but his lawyers hope TO secure further de-
lay by moving for a new trial. and. in the
case of defeat, by appealing to the Su-
preme Court.
1t was proceedings like this which. just
a hundred years ago, led some New Eng
land States to declare lawyers ineligible to
office and to pronounce their calling dis
graceful. The old rule was that lawyer,
as an officer Of the court, was bound to
exert bis full energy to bring the truth to
light. AS the attorney for the people was
expected to use his utmost endeavor t.
convict prisoner. so the attorney for the
defendant took upon himself TO strain
every effort to prove him innocent. The
theory was that, from the collision of the
two intellects, the actual facts of the case
would appear for the enlightenment of the
Jury. That was the old doctrine. In our
day it has undergone some modification
To-daysa prosecuting attorney does not
pursue an indicted prisoner with personal
maleyolence, as though his credit required
the conviction of the accused whether he
were innocent or guilty. District attor-
neys are quite frequently Influenced by an
honest doubt as to the facts, and on such
occasions they either nolle pros the case
or conduct the prosecution with such
lukewarmness that the prisoner gets the
benefit of the doubt. That is the way
high-minded lawyers charged with the
duty of representing the people ars ac-
customed TO act.
But attorneys charged with the defense
of prisoners accused of crime have not
only not improved in their practice. they
have actually gone backward. They have
ceased to consider themselves officers of
the court, whose highest duty is the dis
covery Of truth: they often figure merely
in the light of paid advocates, suborned to
conceal the truth in the interest of the man
who pays them. That is a degrading view
of their calling, and yet it is view which
is sometimes taken by gentlemen who
stand high at the bar. The counsel who
is retained by an accused person is bound
to make the most of every item of testi-
mony and OF every argument which can
induce the jury to acquit his client. Hav-
ing done this. if the evidence carries con-
viction to his own mind that his man is
guilty, duty does not require him to go
any further. He is not called upon to put
in pleas of insanity which his reason re-
jeets, nor to move for a new trial on
grounds which he knows to be cOntempti-
ble When he does either he lowers the high
standard which honorable members of his
profession try to live up to.
Cases are constantly turning up in
which no reasonable man can entertain
doubt as to the facts. This case of Prem
dergast was one of them. He had openly.
with malice prepense, in obedience TO
Satanic impulse, committed an atrocious
murder In the countries of Europe his
trial would not have lasted day, and exc
cution would have swiftly followed. Yet
il took weeks to empane a jury in Chi
cagO, to bring the trial to close and TO
establish the fact that the criminal WAS
responsible. Even now. the convicts