The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-06-30
ENGLISH AND AMERICAN
 HnrYprc
COURTS.

COURTS.
 Speaking generally on the subject of | lynching and it's causes. The Milwaukee Free Press makes this comparison: There is one difference between the crirn- | inal laws and courts of Great Britain and | those of the United States. The laws of Great Britain are made to be enforced. | and the courts are conducted 70 enforce | them. The object of a trial for crime in any county where the British flag waves | is to convict and punish the criminal. Crime is not made attractive by British | courts.
 The Press goes on to say that lynchings
 are unknown in Great Britain or in Brit
 correct statement as we are not suf- hciently well posted to say. The main point of our contemporary statement, however, is found Tn its comparison of the criminal laws and practices of the two countries Its statement that "the laws of Great Britian are made to be enforc- ed" is a reflection on our own laws and courts, but who will say that it is not just? All of us who know anything about the matter know that in many cases trials in criminal cases are postponed. continued. and in other ways allowed to drag along until the witnesses are dead or have left the country and the criminal goes free. It sometimes seems as if courts are held to prevent punishment of criminals.
 The Free Press plainly intimates in the course of the editorial from which we | have quoted, that the postponement by the judge of the trial of White was the
 cause of the Wilmington lynching. Can | we deny that the argument is sound? All
 who are familiar with the type to which White belonged, know that Imprisonment
 has no terrors for him. With the cer- tainty that he is to lead life of idle ness, to be fed, cared for and protected
 with the possibility of escape in the end. he worries little over his condition. We are sure that we will be sustained by all who are well acquainted with the races when we say that to have put White in jail with his trial postponed till Septem- Der, would have had no more deterrent effect on other negroes of his type than a shower of rain would. If the judge had compiled with the request of the Attor- ney-General, and ordered special term of the court to convene at once, there would have been no lynching. If it had been clearly proven that the negro was guilty his execution would have followed and that would have been the end of it. If his innocence had been clearly estab- lished the people would have been satis- fled. In a case of this nature, the old adage, delays are dangerous" specially is applicable. There should be no undue haste, but more than all there should be no unnecessary delay in matter of this kind, for too much depends on the enforce
 ment of the law. In a recent issue of The Hartford (Conn.) Times an unusually eau
 tious and conservative newspaper, we find this:
 The most creditable thing which is said on behalf of the Wilmington folks just now is that if the judge whose duty 1t was to act in this murder case had shown due regard. for public sentiment in stead of making his own personal con venience the main consideration. he would have given the negro an immediate trial and thus preserved respect for the law and averted the killing by the mob. In most of the States of the American Union legal processes are undoubtedly too slow and too uncertain, where gross crimes are committed. There is DO good reason, when overwhelming evidence against a murderer or mutilator is ready. that more than a week should elapse before the penalty of the crime is inflicted. In this Delaware case the negro confessed his crime and gave all the details of it. It is a pity the State could not have acted with such certainty and celerity in the case as to have pre- vented the interference of the mob, with the unnecessary killing of one young boy as one. of the incidents. and the injury of several others