The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1897-10-28
SOLICITOR POT AND FsEE PASSES.

Southern Railroad and the SeaboaYd
Air Line for having issued free passes
to q number OF prominent citizens 10
violation of the law. IL IS also known
that Solicitor Pou failed to draw in
dictments when these presentments
were sent to him by the Grand Jury.
IL is also known that the Solicitor
sealed up these presentments, turned
them over to the Clerk Of the Superior
Court with express orders that they
were not to be opened and no one
should be allowed to see them. This
conduct on the part of the Solicitor is
strange and unusual, to say the least ;
and besides. we know no warrant of
law for it.
There are cases where the Judge
can make an order Of court that GER
tain presentments shall be sealed up
for a certain time and not made pub
lie: For instance, where there IS dan
ger Of a criminal escaping il he should
learn that he had been indicted, and
where it is therefore necessary to not
make public the pIesentments or to
draw an indictment until the criminal
in question can be arrested. In such
case public policy demands such a
course, in order that the ends of JUS
tice may be reached. But even in such
a case the Solicitor has no more right
to refuse to draw an Indictment or to
seal up the presentments without an
order from the Judge, than any other
individual would have.
Now, was this presentment against
the railroads for issuing free passes
such case as we have referred to
above? No. In this case the violators
of the law are two rich and powerful
corporations which cannot escape. 1t
is case where speedy trial is the
surest way to meet the ends of justice
The only way that the rich and pow
erful can violate the law with impunity
is to defeat justice through delay
Therefore, the very same reasons OF
public policy that would made it nee
essary for a presentment to be kept
secret for certain length of time in
the case of an individual criminal who
could escape, make it equally as nee
essary to make the rresentments pub
lie in the case Of rich and powerful
corporation whose method OF defeat
ing justice is by delay and secrecy.
The CAUCASIAN, learning of this I'M
usual procedure, sent reporter to
the Clerk of the Superior Court of
Wake county and requested tc see
the presentments. He declined. When
asked under what law or by what au.
thOrity he refused to allow citizen to
see part of the court record, which
should be public to all men, he stated
that he was acting under positive
orders from the Solicitor.
The custom in our courts il, when q
presentment is made, for the Solici.
tor to draw an indictment at once
where witnesses for the prosecution
are readily accessible, and where wit
nesses for the defence are also readily
accessible, the custom is to pro
coed to try the case at the same
term of court. This. we believe, is the
custom, and we know that it is by NJ
means unusual. In the case of thes.
free pass presentments, all of the wit
nesses for both the prosecution ant
the defence were within one half mil,
of the courthouse. In fact, one O
the most important witnesses was jus
across the street in the office Of tn
Southern Railway, the nearest build
ing to the courthouse in the city
Then why did not the Solicitor sum
mons the witness for the prosecution
draw his indictments, and procee'
with the trial of the offenders?
Where presentments are made an
the witnesses for the prosecution ar
not readily accessible, 50 that an in
dictment cannot be drawn at the sam
term Of court, the custom of the cOur
is for these presentments to be put o
the permanent docket of the court, an
at the next term the presentment dock
ct is laid before the presiding judg
So if there was any valid excuse for til
Solicitor not drawing indictments q
once upon these presentments, VIII
were the presentments not put on til
permanent court docket, as in othe
cases, so that at the next term of til
court the docket containing these pr,
sentiments might be laid before tt
Judge?
| The Supreme Court has LAID dow
certain rules Of practice to govern tt
trial of causes in the Supre me and S,
periOr Courts. Section 96l Of The Coo
makes it the duty of the Supren
Court to prescribe these rules of pra
tice. If any lawyer will turn to tt
10th Report, page 967 he will find Ru
% governing criminal dockets, whit
reads as follows:
"Clerks of the courts will be require
upon the criminal dockets prepared f
the Court and Solicitor. to state al
number the criminal business of I'll
court in the following order:
First, all criminal causes at issu
. I'd, all warrants upon which parti
have been held to answer at the tern
Sd, all presentments made at precedir
terms undisposed Of; 4th, all cas-
: wherein judgments nisi have been e
tered at the preceding term again
defendants and their sureties, al
against defaulting jurors or witness
in behalf of the State"
1t will besseen from the above tn
the clerks of the Superior Courts q
required to prepare criminal dock
for the Court and Solicitor in certa
order, and that the third class of cas-