The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-07-30

would engage in such violations or law, do not proclaim their purpose and. acts from the house tops. but guard well every avenue that would lead to discovery of the crime. This has been demonstrated in the federal court. It seems that in nothing tangible was obtained until 1t was unearthed by a detective. and it may be said that conviction as an easy task, was doubted by the federal authorities unless immunity from punishment was granted to some of the offenders.
 I candidly confess was not cognizant of the extent of the practice or scheme until the exposure in the Federal Court was made. How could have been? lived in another County than the one in which the crime was done, remote from the locality. Several years ago it was in- timated to me that irregularities were being practiced in this County Tn the working of convicts, and the names of two persons were given to me as the guilty ones. At the very next term of the court here, as some of you probably can attest, know the bar can. charged the jury upon the subject as vigorously as my limited ability would allow. and called upon the jury to diligently investigate the matter, and I know that grand jury did it's duty. or honestly tried to do 1t. The result of the labors of the jury was two InOlCtments, one against eaCn or the men whose names had been given 10 me. One was for an assault and battery and the other for kidnapping. The party in- dicted for assault and battery was ar rested during the term of the court at which the indictment was found, and would have been tried at that term but he forfeited his bond and under the law that applied to this County at that time all misdemeanor cases that were undis- posed of at the term to which they were returned had to be transferred to the County Court for trial. that case was transferred, the defendant was tried and acquitted.
 know nothing about the merits of the trial, but I have never heard the right fulness of the acduittal questioned. The defendant who was indicted for kidnap- ping was not arrested until after the ad- tournment of the term at which the in- dlctment was returned.
 At the next term the case was called against him and the sheriff announced that he had been unable after dlligent search to find the State witnesses and that he had been informed that they had moved out of the State. Against the strenuous efforts of the defendant to have the case dismissed the case was contln- ued, and was held on the docket until every possible effort was made to get the the witnesses and 1t was demonstrated to
 
 out of the jurisdiction of the court.
 suspected that the defendant was in- strumental in getting the witnesses out of the State, but had no proof of the fact The cause would be pending now If I could have seen any possibility of ever getting the witnesses to return. The witnesses having moved to another State. were out of the jurisdiction of the court, and there is no way under the law of Alabama to bring a witness back against his will. nor can dispositions be taken in a criminal case by the State. Does this show indisposition on the part of the State Court to make the investigation? 1t cannot be held responsible for this state of affairs. had no suspicion that the witnesses would remove or that the de- fendant would attempt to get them out Of the jurisdiction of the court.
 I charged subsequent grand juries to inquire, and make dilligent investigation of the reported irregularities, and I know that such investigation was made, and bona fide effort was put forth to get the truth, but 1t was unavailing.
 If I had been clothed with authority to put detectives on the track of the offend ing parties. results might have been dif- ferent. Some of the same witnesses who testified before the Federal grand jury were examined before the grand jury here. and know from the reports of the evidence which were made to me by the solicitor and the foreman of the grand jury, that the evidence before the jury did not warrant indictment. If any infiu- ence had been exerted over the witnesses to have them testify falsely before the fury here, know nothing about 1t. If they were intimidated never heard about 1t.
 Without evidence 1t Is a we'll known fact that courts and juries are helpless in efforts to enforce the law. I assert without the fear of successful contradic- ton, that as dilligent effort was made by the grand juries of this County to get at the facts as could have been made. But, it may be said, the Federal Court got the evidence; very true, the Federal Court with its power to call to Its aid the secret service of the government, It's jurisdiction and power to bring witnesses from any State in the Union, ample means to defray expenses. with power to corral the witnesses and keep them from any outside influence against the day of Judgment, took hold of the matter, and may we not trust what has been done by that court is sufficient to effectually stop the crime that has given US so much mo- torfety.
 Again assert. I want 1t understood that I have no word of criticism of the Federal CouEt for taking cognizance of the cases. It has Jurisdiction under the law to do so. and if by reason of circun- stances which we could not control, the State court could not get at the act we should all be glad that a court does exist within the borders of the State In which such matters may be enquired into with out outside interference by the parties charged. take 1t as but an exprssion of the truth when I say I verify believe every right thinking man In Tallapoosa County will endorse the sentiment just expressed.
 I know the efforts that have been made here in the State Court to getsat the facts were made in all good faith. and I further know if the Grand Juries of this county could have had the evil dence that was before the Federal Grand Jury the parties, or some of them at least. would have been indicted here. Whilst Grand Juries may be composed of the kind of men I have described at the same time violations of law may occur This Is a truth which Is confined to no part of the Union, and the negro may be the victim of the violation. This has been demonstrated recently in Illin- ois Indiana and Delaware, allowing that none but the very best men compose the juries in those States. Grand jurors fill the full, measure of duty when they act faithfully and up to the standard re- auired by the oath they assume. What have said in regard to the actions pf the State Court in conneStion with the matter in hand, has been said not in defense of myself as judge of the court, but because it is my desire to place the people of this county, and especially the grand turies in proper light before the world and to acqut them as jurors of