Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-10-06

erroneous rulings on motions for con-
tinuances. and one was on the ground
that the record did not disclose where
the alleged unlicensed sale Of 'liquor
took place. In none or the six cases did
the Court OF Appeals even 30 much as
hint doubt Of the guilt Of the de-
PENDANT.
| TOO MANY UNPROTITABLE CUES
TIONS.
A great variety OF well-settled. and
| otherwise highly Improbable questions.
were presented and pressed upon the
court for decision. There were questions
as to the organization of the grand Juries
that found the indictments: as TO whether
| indictments could be amended Tor mis-
homer: as 20 whether larceny could be
predicated Of the act OF fraudulentiy
taking a purse from anothers pocket
though It was afterwards abandoned;
as to whether an Indictment could be
given to the jury upon which verdict
| OF guilty rendered at former trial was
written: as to whether the jury could
stroll to the place OF homicide during the
recess: as 10 whether the defendant was
entitled to use a report Of the preliminary
examination made fer the Commos-
wealths Attorney by his private steno-
| grapher and as to whether the court
that apple brandy Is intoxicating. 1t
would seem that not a question arose In
| any OF the cases that might not very
| safely have been left to any judge 1T
| 10 preside In courts having such ex-
| tensive jurisdiction as that conferred on
the corporation and circuit courts OF this
| Commonwealth. not TO speak at all or
| the county courts, very many or Whlcn
| are presided over by competent ana ex-
perlenced Judges Some OF the twenty
two defendants were guilty OF wretched
! crimes calculated to arouse the indigha-
ton OF any neighborhood. II Is not ciear
that any Of the twenty-five were lilho,
cent. and Il may be gravely doubted
whether the slightest injustice wouid
have resulted had the judgments OF the
trial courts, which were In the pest po-
sition 10 determine properly the gul,t vi
innocence OF the persons accused peeh
| oro,,rtIv executed or at least, whore rem
| dered by the county courts. executed
! as coon as approved by the circuit courts
| or the circuit Judges.
THE BENTON CASE REVIEW Ed
one of these cases shows what plliilahe
chances are furnished defendants. On the
nth day Of March. 1891, d. W. Benton
according TO the testimony OF e!e-"it
nessses and others, and according 10 the
belief of forty-eight jurymen ana seVer"i
Judges, broke into a house In Loudouh
| county and committed larceny. IN Au.
| gust, 1892, he was tried ana coh'lctpu
| and sentenced to be confined In the pehi-
| Tertiary The Judgment OF the County
Court was reversed by the Circuit Court
| for an irregularity in forming the jury.
| In November, 1892, he was again urea
and convicted. This time the circuit
Court declined to interfere. but there was
a reversal by the Court OF Appeals upon
statutory point. In March. 1893. Benton
was tried a third time, and convicted.
| The Circuit Court second time decliheu
10 interfere, but a second time the Court
OF Appeals reversed. not because there
was error at the trial in March, but De-
cause at the February term OF the court
! a continuance was wrongfully granted on
| the motion Of the Commonwealth ne"
trial was directed, but Benton, not salts
| fed with this. on a writ Of habeas corpus
unsuccessfully urged the Court OF APP
| peals to follow out its judgment TO what
! he cOntended was the logical CONCLUSION
and discharge him. IRE County Court
Of Loudoun afterwards removed the case
to the County Court OF Fairfax for trial.
| 1t remained some time in the latter court,
but the greatest difficulty being found
In securing the attendance OF witnesses
| from a distance, IL was removed by the
| County Court OF Fairfax TO the County
| Court Of Fauquier. where. In August, lo9f'
there was a trial and conviction. Last
year the judgment of the Fauquier court
| was affirmed by the Circuit Court. ana
this year it has been affirmed by the
| Court Of Appeals. The defendant was not
| benefited In the end, pr the fourth trial
resulted in {. longer sentence than any
! Of the previous trial; but that fact in no
way compensates for the generalization
| and expense entaied upon society, ana III
| no way excuses the system under which an
undoubtediy-guil man, taking all the
| chances. In the course or prouacted
| fight, more than once very nearly secured
the freedom TO which he was not entitled.
No system is excusable which makes pos
slble what occurred in the Benton case.
DELAYS BEFORE AND AFTER TRIAL
The counter movement Of which have
spoken will involve a consideration OF
| the delays that precede trials as well as
| the delays which follow. 1t will, think
! make the prosecutor a ualarled oiilcer
| and II Will insist on the swift and dlligent
| Investigation OF offences. IL may relieve
| the prosecution Of the duty OF waiting on
| the grand jury by abolishing an institu-
| ton that more than one cautious reIormer
| holds has become as useless TO good
| system Of good criminal law as IL the
vermiform appendix TO the human body
|
| judges be ADLER and more learned, and,
therefore. more safely be trusted with a
| full control of cases. 1t VIII attend more
| carefully to the organization or Juries. III
! will sharply restrict the defendants right
| of appeal, and the power Of the higher
courts TO grant writs Of error and reverse
| judgments, and il Will look forward TO
! the fine when, with undisputed fairness
| to those accused OF crime, that right may
| l. -. nil
| individual at the expense OF society, nor
will it exalt society at the expense of the
individual. But it Will endeayor TO place
] both upon an equal plane. where injustice
can be suffered by neither.
| This subject is not being dIsregarded by
lawyers The Georgia Bar Association,
| for example has already delivered It's
opinion, strongly deprecating he delays
| that have become lntolei able, LA adYo-
eating the enactment OF a ,ta,use to pre-
vent reversal. unless IL appear that the
error alleged operated to deprive the
prisoner OF substantial justice.
1t is surely a subject to which
| lawyers should address themselves. IL L.
sufficiently important 10 deserve their re-
hection. their study. and their best efforts.
II had best be dealt with by them. They
can deal with it more calmly than others.
| and with better knowledge OF the cause
| and extent Of the evils and the remedies
that should be employed II any obstacles
| or prejudices prevent them from dealing
with II. they might merit the ill-natured
fling OF Voltaire. who called our profess
sion the conservators Of barbarism. But
the record of the past warrants the ex-
| pectation that there will be no display or
| inability or reluctance. The lawyers have
been the law reformers. The most shining
names in the list of those who were fore
most in mitigating the harshness and