The Savannah morning news., 1902-11-07
SCOPE OF The BILL
WHICH WILL BE INTRODUCED IN
THE LEGISLATURE.
TO DEFEAT DILAT0RY TACTICS
IN THE PROSECUTION OF CRIMI-
NAILS IN COUNTY COURTS.

1fr. Harvey. Author of the Measure,
Defines Its ScOpe-DOes Not Con-
template the Superior Courts of
the State-Limits Appellate Right
of Defendan in County Court in
MfsdemeanOr Cnses-Defects of the
Present Law-AnOrds Abundn mt
Opportunity for the Invocation of
DiIRtOry MeRsures-QuestiOn of
Expense Not TO BE Overlook ed-Mr.
Harvey Anticipates No Opposition
to the Passage of the Measure.
Text of the Act.
In explaining the bill which he in
tends to have introduced in the Legis-
lature, which has as its purport the
abolition of the right of persons
charged in the County Court with
lnisdemeanor to demand an indict-
ment, Mr. L. Gordon Harvey said yes
terday that the bill did not contem-
plate in it's scope the Superior Courts
of the state. but rather includes only
the county courts The province and
Jurisdiction of the County Court in
counties outside of Chatham, and a
number of others, being different from
the Superior Court of Chatham. which
is the only County Court, the County
Court here having been abolished sew
eral years ago.
The relief which the bill is intended
to provide is not needed in this and
other counties where the City Court
exists, and where the Superior Court
is in session practically the whole
year round. A draught of the bill is
necessary for a proper understanding
of it's purport. 1t is, in full, as fol-
lows:
Text of the Bill.
A bill to be entitled an act to pro-
vide for the trial of all criminal cases
returnable to the county courts in this
state, of which the court has juris-
diction, upon written accusation with
out indictment or presentment by a
grand jury, and the form of said
accusation.
Section. l. Be it enacted by the
General Assembly of the state of Geor-
gia, and it is hereby enacted by au-
thority of the same, that all. criminal
cases returnable to the county courts
in this state. of which said courts
have jurisdiction, shall be tried there
in upon written accusation setting
forth plainly the offense charged,
which accusation shall be signed by
the prosecutor or the prosecuting Of
ficer of the county court without in
dictment or presentment by any grand
jury, and no defendant in any of such
cases shall have the right to demand
an indictment or presentment by the
grand jury.
Section 2. Be 1t further enacted that
all laws and parts of laws in conflict
with this act be and the same are
hereby repealed.
Its Intent In n Nutshell.
The purport of the act, it may be
readily seen, is to deprive defendants
charged with a misdemeanor from the
existing right to demand an indictment.
This right is seldom demanded in coun-
ties when there is a city court. the
object in the demand being generally
TO thwart or delay sentence, for in the
counties which have county courts the
grand jury is in session only a short
time in the year.
Mr.. Harvey, who is solicitor of the
County Court of Bryan, pointed out the
abuses which the bill purposes to rec
tify, its merits and its need. In many
of the counties, particularly in those
having the county court instead of a
city court, the Superior Court is in
session but twice a year, in May and
November, and oft times a term lasts
but a few days. In that event the
grand jurors are discharged until the
next term of court.
Defects of Present Law.
The County Court. on the other
hand, meets monthly. If an accusa-
ton be found the accused has the right
TO demand an Indictment, in which
event he is not tried until the grand
jury meets and finds the necessary in
dictment. This might be six months.
Not only are the ends of justice de-
layed, but it is often true that the wit
nesses to the crime of which the ac-
cused stands charged have scattered,
and II is practically impossible under
the limited testimony at hand to find
an indictment.
OF course there are many cases
where the demand is not made for the
purpose of delay. Such a case is an
exception. II has often happened that
the accused, through dilatory tactics,
has escaped punishment The question
VI expense Is one, TOO, TO winch NT.
Harvey calls special attention. Not
only does the finding of the indictment
entail expense to the county, but, un-
less the prisoner is out under bond
he has to be cared for by the county
This amounts to a good deal in a
county where the care of prisoners is
not carried on upon such a wholesale
scale as in the larger counties.
Anticipates No Opposition.
The enactment of the bill would
necessitate the repeal of several sec
tons of the code this repeal being
provided for in the second section OF
the act. Mr.. Harvey said that he
thought there was no doubt that the
bill would be passed without any ap-
preciable amount of opposition. SEN
stor Moore will father 1t. and will
introduce IL in the Legislature in the
near future.
A short time ago the City Court of
Atlanta was, by a special act, Invested
of any power to turn a prisoner over
to the Superior Court under a demand
for an indictment. The provisions of
the act were similar to the one now
proposed. The special enactment was,
however, intended only for the City
Court of Atlanta, and it's provisions
did not operate on the other city
courts throughout the state The bill
which Mr.. Harvey intends to have
presented, and which he has already
forwarded to Atlanta, will, in its scope,
include all of the county courts in the
state.
Mr.. Harvey said that the enactment
If hin xx-or1Id ttr1n,rh+adixy raIfax,n