The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-10-28

opinion of the court that, no matter how
the Federal questions might have been
| raised, nor how strenuously insisted on.
the decision would have been the same
The sentence is declared TO be more
severe than ever before inflicted in the
state for like offense, and greater than
can be inflicted for the offense in any
other American judicatory. 1T is equal
to the maximum denounced by the Legis-
lature of North Carolina for a conspiracy
to overthrow the government or to levy
war against the State'
The cases Of State VS.. Powell (121 n. G..
625) and State VS. Wilson Q21 n. C. $50
are then cited, in each of which there was
an alleged conspiracy to prostitute a
young girl by the false pretense of a
mock marriage, and in both of which
the conspiracy was successful. In both
cases the sentence for the guilty man
was two years Oh the roads, though in the
one case the court defines the crime as
one OF peculiar atrocity'' and the de-
PENDANT in the other as "a notorious vio-
lator of the law and openly defies the
law and its process"
What commentary says the brief,
are these cases on the morals OF a COM
munity which can complacently view such
trivial punishment for such hideous
crimes
Shall it be said of this great State 1"
that she has come to this: that she is
five times more solicitous to protect the
paltry dollars of the wine merchant Gar
rett than to guard the virtue OF her We.
men! Or are we to infer that she has
one measure of punishment for her OWN
citizens, though they be notorious viola
tors of the law and openly defy the law
and its process, and another and harsher
measure for the stranger within her
gates?''
Also State vs.. Driver Us n. c., 423) is
cited in which it was held that sentence
OF five years in the county jail and rec
osnlzance OF $500 to keep the peace there
after for five years for wife-beating was
''cruel and unusual" and the case was
reversed.
Referring to the statement in the re-
turn that 1t appeared to the court, be-
fore passing sentence, that the defend
ants were wanted in South Carolina and
Iowa and that one Mr. Wheeler had rec
ognized them as the men who had cheated
him, the brief says:
This stands admitted by the State
Not admitted by failure to deny, but
actually and solemnly affirmed in order
to justify this oppressive judgment, They
were wanted in Iowa. They were wanted
III South Carolina! And some busy Mr.
Wheeler goes to the Jail and recognizes
them as having swindled him, And where
and to whom did he impart this discov-
cry? Not under the sanction of an oath
nor under the penalty of examine
ton. Did he sit at the ear of the
judge. squat like a toad and pour MS
venom in there? There was no hint ..
whisper at the trial of these various other
conspiracies there is nothing in the rec
ord about them; and they were simply
so many stabs in the back, with no chance
TO defend. 1t Is not easy to write
temporarily about such a proceeding.
Defendants We're wholly ignorant
that anything of the kind was going on.
1t was simply an instance of the Dreyfus
secret dossier. If such a thing
can be tolerated to enable the court TO
assess the punishment, why may it not
be done to determine guilt or innocence
Jeffreys was known in many cases to get
the pleasure of the King before forcing
conviction"
The greater part Of the brief is devo-
ted to a discussion of the law in regard to
conspiracy. and it is declared that IF
there ever were any such thing as a COM
mon law Of criminal conspiracy in the
State of North Carolina, it has been abol-
ished by statute" And this conclusion is
reached: There beingAn law OF con-
sriracy, statutory or common, in North
Carolina covering this offense, defendants
were simply tried by a mob and not By
due process of law
FRED l.. MERRITT.