The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1901-10-24
Baltimore Sun .

Baltimore Sun.
The action of the New York Court
Of Appeals in reversing tho conviction
OF Roland b. Molineux was not Q sur
prise to lawyers familiar with the
conditions under which the convic-
viction OF the alleged murderer WAS
accomplished. The crime Of which
Molinsux was adjudged guilty was
committed nearly three years ago
A year and eight months after the
death Of Mrs. Katherine j. Adams
from poison alleged to have been sent
through the mails by Molineux, the
latter was convicted on purely cir
cumstantial evidence, after a trial in
which great deal Of irrelevant testi-
mony was introduced and in which
handwriting experts figured conspicu-
ously. The charge Of the presiding
judge to the jury was regarded as un-
fair to tho accused man. In these
circumstances, lawyers did not hesi-
tate to express the opinion that the
conviction ought not to be allowed to
stand, and that the Court of Appeals 8
would feel compelled to reverse the
action of the court below.
The New York Tribune, one OF the
most conservative newspapers in the
metropolis, makes startling charges
against those who were responsible
for the conviction Of Molinsux. The
evident intent of the prosecution,
says our New York contemporary.
was less to punish a criminal than to
make a case which would justify the
original accusation and give tho
prosecutors the glory ofhaving solved
murder mystery. The presiding
judge, according to the Same author
ity, allowed his court to be made the
instrument Of a conviction which he
ought to have known was illegal.
Another Now York newspaper, in
an elaborate review Of the Court Of
Appeals decision, declares that "it
would have been q sad day for the
State If the conviction OF = man on
the charge of capital offsnse
on such incompetent evidence had
been sustained" On the whole, the
reversal of the verdict of the lower
court is regarded as an act of simple
justice, and as absolutely necessary
in order to remove all possibility OF
the execution Of a man who, il not in
nocent. has certainly not been proved
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
1t is rather alarming to be told
that, under our free institutions, the
machinery Of justice can be perverted
in great city like New York to secure
convictions solely to add to tho fame
of those who conduct prosecutions.
If such be the case, no man accused
of crime is safe. 1t is astonishing
that any Judge who prizes his reputa-
ception OF the duties OF Judge,
should, as alleged by our Now York
contemporaries, permit prosecuting
officers to introduce improper evil
dence. 1t is almost inconceivabls,
in this enlightened age, that . Judge
should, in q case where . mans life
was at stake, deliver . charge to the
jury which practically left it no alter
native but to bring in verdict OF
guilty. The theory Of the law 10 that
every man is assumed to be innocent
until he is proved guilty. II, as is
suggested by New York newspapers,
prosecuting officers of the metropolis
reverse that principle and assume
that every man is guilty until he
establishes his innocence, just YER
dict would be the exception rather
than the rule in New York. A man
convicted under such circumstances
and made to pay the death penalty
would be the victim OF judicial lynch
ing-and lynching by the courts
would be even greater crime than
lynching by the mob.
Fortunately, under our Judicial
system, there is remedy against
un Just convictions, for Courts Cf APP
peal can usually be relied upon to re-
verse verdicts not warranted by the
law and the evidence: BY this means
ample security is Afforded against
the blunders Of inferior courts. Of
course, this involves delay and ex-
pense, but neither time nor money IL
wasted in securing exact justice. In
this connection the Philadelphia Press
makes a suggestion which will not be
approved by those who have conf
dence in the integrity Of our judges
and in the efficiency Of our Judicial
system. The Press says that "our
system OF criminal law has ended in
appeals which create that uncertain
Justice which the Roman historian
long since pronounced the worst Of
tyranny. The practical result Is that
there is one law for the man who
spends his money freely, AS in the
Molineux case. and another for the
man without money-and no certain
law for either" II that were really
the case. the people would lose all
faith in the courts, and our civiliza-
tion would be failure in one OF its
vital parts. Courts may often make
there may be judges who
are not AZ scrupulous IS they should
be; there are possibly prosecuting
officials who are moro desirous OF OBJ
tanning glory from the conviction OF
accused persons than OF securing JUS
tice. Even conceding the existence
of some defects in our methods OF
dispensing justice, it does not follow
that the whole system is bad. or even
open TO suspicion. The great major
ity OF Judges are men Of integrity,
to do their duty to society TO
the best of their ability. and sincere
in their purpose to secure justice for
all with whom they have to deal in .
judicial capacity. The Moiineux case
simply proves that the administra-
tion OF justice is not perfect in all
its parts. II an inferior court con-
victed Molineux unjustly, however,
the higher court has redressed the
wrong. AS long as We have Courts
of Appeal to review the decisions OF