The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-06-29
JUSTICE HINDEREp IN TEXAS.


The Post today publishes the full text of the de-.
cison Of the court of criminal appeals in the case
Gregorio Cortez and urges every thoughtful citizen
10 give 1t a careful reading
The Post assumes, for the sake of the argument
and out of respect for the court that the decision is
correct law but protests that it not be good law
Under the reasoning of this decision any com.
nunity that takes intelligent cognzance of a local
crime and lends itself actively to the enforcement of
law in given disquaifes itself for jury service
Because the news of the crime conspicuously pub
shed in the San Antonio Express, Galveston News
and Houston Post because the people of Karnes
county read about it, because they offered reward
for the arrest Of the accused and because no LAWYER
in the county would undertake his defense the court
holds that there should have been change of venue
This ruling is founded the doubtful adage of the
law that prejudice and prejudgment amount to the
same thing"
But this is a fallacious use of terms Knowledge
Of an act is not preiudgment of crime. The people
or harnes county could be minutely acquainted with
the fact OF the homicide without prejudgng the mo.
tive or proyocaton Indeed as rational beings they
could have believed that Cortez was guilty of pre-.
meditated murder and stll be incapacitated for
forming another conclusion upon sufficient evidence.
is SANDER upon citizenship to hold that knowledge
OF circumstance constitutes a prejudice
The teaching of the decision in this respect is that
when crime is committed the people of the com.
munlty shall close their eyes and ears, tnru their
packs upon the scene and refuse to lend themselves
TO the constahulary either as possemen or as moral
supporters Such view is contrary to every principle
&" civic duty. Society poperly organized is com.
poste of alert citizens. each equally charged with
preserving law and order. and the man who does not
actively lend himself to the apprehension and prose.
outlon OF persons charged with crime u.s. at least
Indifferent TO his public obligations This is all that
the citizens Of Karnes county did and the court S
assumption that because of their interest in the an.
prehension and prosecution they were ncapable Of
the judicial discernment that is required in jurors is
as violent as it would be say that the honorable
members of the court who undoubtedly read the cur.
rent newspaper accounts of the crime were thereby
mcepacitated for sitting on the case.
The court holds, further, that because sberif
Morris did not have for the arrest of Cortez
the homicide was not more than mansaughter The
reasoning on this point is greatly involved but that
appears TO be the conclusion. AS before. it is as.
sumed that the ruling is in accordance with tho law
and the precedents but The Post again insists that
the law is bad, sheriff is presumed 10 be man NJ
fair discretion He is under bond and responsible for
mis- errors He will not reoklessy arrest men upon
insufficient information. To require him to go six
miles the distance named in the Cortez ncident) 10
procure warrant. when he is crediby advised that
suspected felon is about to make his escape is a
'"'N "H4NH 10 uouhu 10 nlnuer the execution he
law, Besides, an arrest is not a conviction II &c =
simple haling to where guilt or innocence is 70
be determined
Inc unhappy and disastrous consequences OF such
a requirement are abundantly exemplifed in this
case man charged with horsetheft killed two
sh~Tihs and one posseman, and In the first case the
court virtually holds that he is guilty of no mora
than manslaughter There is nothing to show thai
results would have been different ii warrant had
been formally procured, but it is fact that the man
arrested proved himself to be desperate character
and whether he was about to escape or not the
tragedy shows that 1t was not case permitting
the delays of formality.
In respect to the killing, the court sets up the
testimony of the wife OF Cortes against the testimony
OF Boone Choate, who accompanied the sheriff which
seems 70 the lay mind to be injudcious balancing
OF evidence Be that as 1t may the undisputed fact
remains that Cortez told that he was wanted for
horsetheft that he refused TO be arrested and killed
the officer in the attempt to take him into custody
II TINS under the law is only msnslaughter again we
protest that the law is bad.
The Post has great respect for the law and the
courts but careful study OF ts case in connection
with other cases OF occurrence brings the con
clusion that something is radically wrong with the
criminal Jurisprudence of Texas
In the first place. the test OF Jurors makes 1t d,