The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-02-15

of his observation that it would be up
held by the bar the land over. That per
jury is not infrequently an incident in tho
I trial of a holly contested case all agree
But that half of the people will deliber.
ately falsify under oath is denied on al
! hands
His second proposition, the establish.
ment of distinct arm of the states at
/ torney's office for the prosecution of per
| jury. with the belief that ii would act as
| a deterrent is also opposed just as
! strongly. Punishment of crime so say the
/ Chicago leading lawyers, never deferred
/ any man from its commission. This in
disputable fact has given jurists and pros
| ecuting officers more trouble than any
other element in the practice.
Perjury is defined legally to be the
4 swearing falsely upon any vital issue in
/ the case on trial, or the perverson of
facts, with the intent to deceive and mis-
lead. Mere lying, however repelant TO
the honorable mind, is not a crime under
the law of Illinois, at any rate. But If the
lie affects material point in the case,
then perjury has been committed by him
who uttered the false statement of fact.
If he lies about something not essential
10 the issues he is no perjurer in the eyes
of the law. His credibility as "A witness
is affected thereby, but he cannot be held
TO account under the penal section. He
has merely been romancing.
There are several conditions which will
produce legal perjury. First in i1npor-
lance, because of moral turpitude, is
where the witness purposely distorts the
facts to suit himself knowing he is doing
this. Next comes that condition of mind
whereby Il man, never having in his life
tended to the commission OF certain
act complained of, forgetful of the lapse.
comes into court and denies ever having
committed II. He is perjuref, but not
willingly so. He swears to what is false,
but he believes he is telling the truth
His statement might affect vital point
in the case. and thus render him liable
TO punishment. But he is guiltless from a
moral standpoint.
Then there is the case OF the man who
lies by suggestion For instance, he has
been witness to something. Some other
man is also witness. He is asked If he
remembers Il certain date. He does not.
But the other fellow calls his attention
to certain facts he does remember and
then tells him that was the date. The
man will brighten up, accept the sugges-
ton and Is innocent of intent to do harm.
Yet he is a perjurer If he affects the vital
issue. Self-interest will also cause a man
to distort facts long since past. He fails
to recollect all that transpired, so he tells
his story with such a coloring as will
help his own case. He is not Intentionally
guilty of bearing false witness, but none
the less he is a perjurer.
BY this 1t will be seen that the man who
deliberately commits the crime is the
least numerous. In the judgment of law
yers of experience on the bench and at
the bar, true perjury is rare instead of
being present in most cases tried in court.
These same experts admit that of the 9TH
er classes of perjury there is great deal.
This seems to be the situation. Uncon-
scious perjury. one member of the bar
.t.-f to Ila.ifl f,IG
swearing is rare on the same authority.
But the wholesale decentralization of the
people is emphaticaly denied by the wit
nesses the New York jury advocate relied
upon to sustain him.
This statement of Mr.. Whitaker
said Adams A. Goodrich sis undoubtedly
true, but with decided qualification. No
man can say that such proportion Of the
people wllfully lie in giving testimony
When it comes to deliberate false swear
ing. | should say the estimate is much too
high In fact, such perjury is extremely
infrequcnt. | have too much confidence
in the integrity of the human race TO con-
cede anything like such a number or per-
centage. But that there is false swearing
nnocently done, is true of most holly
contested cases. 1t might be that the !
matter under discussion took place year
or two ago. Then the witness is called
upon to say what he remembers. Iiis
memory is fallibe his interests make it
undesirable To admit facts sworn to by
his opponent. and he, believing that the
conduct attributed to him is false, be-
cause at variance with his whole life, de- |
MES the act lie gives false testimony.
vet he is innocent of intent to lie. Ii would !
be uncharitable TO call him wllful per-
1urer, yet he commits the crime in the 1
manner | have outlined. With such "A |
qualification, the statement of Mr.. Whit |
taker is true.
Il think Mr. Whitaker takes very |
narrow view of the natter, was the /
of eX-Judge Lorin G. Collins. 1T /
Is too much 10 say that deliberate perjury
Is committed in half the cases tried. 1t
is my belief that Observation-Disclosures will
account for 30 per cent of the apparent
cases of perjury The point of view is an
important element. No two men. see an
occurrence from the same standpoint. a
man and his wife may view the same
thing and disagree concerning its vital
features. If You see thing and another
man sees it also. it would be extremely
rare for you both TO give the same ac-
,ount of it. Then, If you differ who can
say that either has lied?
"Supposing | should be i'm my place of
business engaged in some engrossng bust
less, My mind would be filled with il TO
he exclusion of all else. Then you come
n to see me and we talk over PROPOSE
i'iAs Iph Sp uNaA anu III time Iilu lndt
'ou have an idea of what we agreed to
widely at variance with my own. My
mind at one time was working dually.
vas not giving the attention to YOU that
should. and that l thought did give.
Ne would disagree on essentials and
night easily go into court and swear To
mr. understandings and fatty deny state
nents made by each other. Who would
e able to say that one or the other was
wing? Yet that is just what is being done
ally. Now. such cases as these are the
mes | firmly believe Mr.. Whitaker had
u mind in making such a sweeping
barge, Perjury pure and simple false
wearing, is extremely rare. My expert
noes on the bench and at the bar have
ad me to this conclusion. The people are
ot demoralized. but they fail To get clear
and thus seem To perjure
themselves"
III Mr.. Whitaker means that in half