The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-04-07
SCREEN MOTION oyERRULED.
JUDGE FALLIGANT DECIDES
AGAINST JUDGE MACDONELL.

The Present Form of Sentencing
MisdemeanOr Prisoners TO the
Chain-gang UpheId-Has Been in
Use for a Quarter of a Century
and Has Never Before Been cues
tioned-Might Have Depleted the
Chain-gang Had Judge MacDOn-
eu's Point Been UpheId-The Mat
ter May BE Appealed to the SUI
preme Court.
Judge Faligant yesterday rendered his
decision upon the point raised by Hon. A.
n MacDonen in his motion to set aside
the sentence and release the prisoner. N.
ID Screen, who was sentenced at the De-
cember term of the court to twelve months
ON the chain-gang for bigamy.
Judge MacDonen raised the point that
the sentence was Illegal because his client
had been sentenced to twelve months i'm
prisonment in the county jail this being
the form of the sentence, whereas the state
law does not permit a misdemeanor to be
nunished by Imprisonment, exceeding six
months In effect the point was an attack
upon the form of sentence used by the
court in sentencing misdemeanor prison
ers TO the chain-gang.
The motion was overruled by Judge FAT
hgant Had he upheld the point raised by
Judge yMacDonell, it would probably have
been necessary TO release the prisoner and
il might also have become necessary to re-
lease a number of other prisoners who had
been similarly sentenced.
Judge Falhgant's decision is as follows:
Passing by the question whether the
present motion on the writ of habeas cor
pus is the correct remedy TO test the
questions involved it is proper TO remark
that the form of alternative sentence used
in this case is the alter
native chain-gang sentence adopt
ed. as l am informed by the clerk,
perhaps % years ago and used by the
successive judges of this court up to date
without question. 1t is not and never was
intended to be an alternative sentence
without work. as in the case of Hathcock
vs. the state, So Ga, 81. Under this alter
native chain-gang sentence, the imprison-
ment is only the necessary incident be-
cause without 1t the chain-gang sentence
could not be carried out.
In Brady VS.. Jarrett, 101 Ga, 101, the
Supreme Court says. I'VE lay down as
our first proposition, that it was I'M
doubtedly lawful to keep the prisoner con-
fined al night or at any other time appro-
pirate time until his sentences had been
served out. This is SO obviously true that
there seems TO be no occasion for reasoning
on the subject. 1t is hardly to be sup
posed that chan-gang prisoners, if set at
liberty at the close of the day, would re-
port for work on the ensuing morning
Plainly such people must be safely kept at
night so as to prevent escapes and what
has just been said applies as wen to any
other time. such as the Sabbath days, when
the weather is inclement, and other occa-
sons when the prosecution of the public
work is necessarily suspended"
when the chain-gang was small the
Il prisoners We're confined in the county jail
building at night and when not at work
But when it became larger (now continu-
ousy more than 200) and the place of labor
i more distant, the convict camp was estab-
lished by the county authorities, and a
regular place of Imprisonment erected at
the camp as part of the county Jail sys-
Il TEN, where the chain-gang prisoners are
H incarcerated at night and when not en-
a gagged In labor. When, as in this case, the
H chain-gang sentence takes effect, the pris-
Il oner is turned over to the county authorl-
h ties and conducted to the convict camp
H to serve out his sentence. The petition
shows that it was done in the case under
consideration. A change of words would
not change the practical effect.
IF the form of words used is inapt, or
the word hard before labor is objection
able, it does not seem to be in the power
OF this court at the term succeeding that
at which sentence was pronounced, to
make any change unless directed to do so
by the Supreme Court. Under the usual
practice in Georgia it is for that court
TO suggest any necessary change, always
securing the carrying out of what is legal
IN the sentence. The motion to set aside
me sentence and release the prisoner is
refused
a Judge MacDonell may carry the matter
10 the Supreme Court, as he is interested
IN the legal phase of the question, as well
as desirous Of helping his client, whom
ne believes to be only technically guilty
OF the charge against him.