Windham County reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1901-1906, 1903-11-27
Justice Brewer on Appeals.


In recent article in the Independ-
ent, Justice David Brewer of the Unit
ed States supreme court extends his
previously expressed objection to APP
peals in criminal cases to include APP
peals in civil cases. He dwells upon
the injustice arising from our appeal
usages and severely indicts our whole
system of Jurisprudence
After recalling the fact that lin Eng
land and in our federal courts up to
the last few years there was no right
of appeal in criminal cases. he goes
on to say that "it is not right guaran-
teed by the constitution of the United
States, as has been repeatedly held by
the supreme court" and neither is it
a natural right"-it is simply statu-
tory privilege" In criminal cases,
says Justice Brewer, the right of APP
of crime" and leads communities to
take the execution of the law into their
own hands. In civil cases the right
of appeal makes the trial court care
less. crowds the dockets of the appel
late courts beyond measure, and bur-
dens those courts so that they are UNI
able to give each case proper con-
sideration. Justice Brewer would
grant full power to appellate courts
to review the judgment of trial
courts; but what l object to-" he says,
"is the right of the party defeated in
the one court to compel such review in
the other"
He thinks there is very little danger
that innocent men would suffer if this
right were denied and points out that
this view of the question is affirmed by
experience in jurisdictions where there
is no right of appeal Moreover the
conditions of a criminal trial all favor
the defendant the burden of proof be-
ty of defence against the charge be-
ing given the accused. Should jury
be influenced by popular prejudice or
temporary feeling to do grievous
wrong in the face of testimony, he says,
it must be remembered that no con-
scientious judge will let a verdict
stand of whose justice he is not salts
fed
He concludes: "One thing is clear
and should always be borne in mind
Whatever the sitting process of sue
cessive appeals may accomplish in as
certaining the exact truth, justice de-
layed is often justice denied. The
early end of every litigation should be
one of the great objects of all judicial
proceedings"
The only reasonable objection to the
granting of appeals is that the privi-
lege is so often seized upon by the
guilty accused to gain time for the
working of schemes to evade the PEN
atty of the law. Delay should not de-
feat justice but it often undoubtedly
does The first trial of an accused
person should not be held until both
sides have had ample opportunity to
obtain and present all the facts in con-
nection with the case and if, then guilt
is plainly established we see no rea-
son why final judgment and proper
punishment should be delayed.
The delays and evasions occasioned
through the use of appeals are not the
cause of lynchings but do make a
plausible excuse for them, to the UNI
thinking. Nothing can really excuse
lynching, but it should not be possible |
for the lawless rabble to say: THE /
law has let so many guilty go I'M
punished that we We're resolved that |
this human fiend should not escape"
1t would be better to abolish or stern
ly restrict the RICH: of appeal to ex-
ceptional cases, and then to make first
trials more searching, more carefully |,
considerate of all phases of the mat
ter in question, as would naturally re-
suit with the understanding that the
cused person should have the right to
4 thorough investigation of his case,
but he should not have the opportunity =,
In iIlpple with iuStice