Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1901-02-23
DON'T BE IN A HURRY.

There ~ a bin before the Legislature
for the abolition Of the office Of District
Attorney. The reason for its presen-
tation appears to be the non-necessity
Of the office II Is claimed that the
county attorneys are competent and
able to perform the duties that are
imposed upon the district attorneys
and therefore the latter are a needless
expense II Is argued that the abolition
Of the Office would make great
pecuniary saving to the State.
Before action is finally taken on
this measure, It ought to be carefully
and calmly considered. The law Gre
ating the Office was passed only two
years ago. The inoumbents, elected
by popular vote, did not take their
places until the first day Of the pres
ent year. They are to hold their Of
fees for four years from that date.
They will do so even II the bill now
offered should be passed.
Why this haste to abolish an office
which has not yet been tested as to its
necessity and benefits? The law, as
found In the Statutes of 1899. Is we'll
framed and the duties of the Office are
clearly defined. and the compensation
is fixed at q reasonable sum. The need
for this office, which Ia q State position,
was seen In the Importance frequently
attached to criminal cases which occa-
slonally arise, calling for experience
and legal ability Of high character.
County attorneys are usually engaged
In county affairs and In the prosecu-
ton Of petty offenses. pretty closely,
There may be a few small counties
where they have sufficient time, and al
50 the necessary qualifications to at
tend to the prosecutions for high crimes
before the District courts But as a
rule they have enough to do in the
legitimate sphere allotted to their posi-
ton. The judicial district, It seems.
ought to have its district attorney as
provided In the statute Of two years
ago.
The second and third judicial dis
Jricts certainly need district attorney
each. In fact the third district re-
quires an assistant attorney. The bust
ness of the court is greater than one
man can fully transact. To abolish
the Office in these districts would be
detrimental TO the public interest, The
members from the populated districts
will readily see this, and we hope they
viii take an interest In the matter, and
enllghten others in regard to 1t. The
expense, of course, has to be considered,
but that does not count against the
need for criminal prosecution Of felon-
les, conducted with ability and legal
learning.
Would II not be better. seeing that
the present incumbents will hold their
offices four years whether the bill
passes or not to let the matter so over
until the next Legislature meets, two
years from now, by which time the
test will have been made, as to the
necessity and benefits or otherwise of
the law as 1t stands at present? There
ia no pressing requirement for instant
action. The haste to repeal law,
passed at the last session Of the Leg
islature, looks like a reflection upon It
by the present body II experience
shows II to be harmful or needless,
then action could be taken upon II
without that appearance. In any event,
we suggest that this measure should
not be passed In haste TO be perhaps
repented of at leisure.