The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1904-12-16
UNJUST SENTENCE2
Infamous Punishment On
Iy For Felony.
Argument in Supreme Court in the
Case of Huff Sentenced to Work
House and Roads For a Sim
Pile Assault.

In the Supreme Court yesterday
there was argued case of much in
lerest. that of the state V. Huff. from
Wake county, who had been sentenced
% thirty days on the road for a simple
assault
Huff, it will be remembered, was in
Iicted for an assault with intent to
commit rape, but the conviction being
Tor simple assault the sentence im-
posed by the lower court was that he
be committed to the work house OF
Wake county and worked on the pub-
tic roads for thirty days. From TINS
huff Appeared. his attorney, Mr.. 3.
IS. BeckWlth, holding that the punish
ment did not lit the conviction.
In the argument yesterday Mr..
Beckwlth commended that inasmucn ..s
.tuff was convicted OF a simple as
sault. a sentence to the public roads
involved an infamous punishment, ana
was in violation OF the PROVISIONS 81
The Constitution; that tor a mlsde-
meanor judgment cannot be rendered
as for a felony that the fundamental
principles of a free State We're violated,
ana that such a sentence conflicts with
,he sense of justice. Mr.. BeckWith
cited the Constitution of North Car
DINA, the Bill of Rights and many
authorities to sustain his contention
that an infamous punishment mad
Deen adjudged for n simple misde-
meanor that the clothes of shame
the conVicts garb, should not be
placed upon one so convicted. That
there should be punishment, he agreed,
out not as for felony. In his argu-
Mr.. Beckwith took a lively fall out
Of Justices of the Peace whom he
termed these mighty chief justices of
the peace" saying From pestilence,
famine and sudden death good Lord
deliver u.s. is the prayer of the saints.
But for the sinners, guilty of small
faults, who must appear before these
allwise chief justices of the peace
who hunt in pairs, and love a bill Of
cost almost as much as they love JUS
tice, we pray this court to deliver them
and us" Preceding this Mr.. Becllwith
said that once a chief justice OF
Raleigh had told him that an opinion
Of Chief Justice Ruffin might go in the
supreme Court, but it was mo good"
IN his.
Attorney General Gilmer for the
State contended that the Constitution
of North Carolina. Article If, section
/, authorizes as punishment for
crime a sentence of Imprisonment with
or without hard labor, and that this
may be carried into execution by work
and labor on the public works or high
ways. That for many years it has
been the policy of the State to pro-
vide for the working of prisoners cou-
victed of crime either before 4 magfs-
trate or in the Superior Court, in Ger
tain cases, on the public roads
The attention of the court was d.
rected especially to the Wake county
road law being section 551 Public
Laws 1903. which authorizes the Coun-
" Commissioners To construct suitable
camps for the safe keeping of con-
victs. and il was contended that un-
de- the general provisions of law pei
sons convicted of Offenses in the iuris-
diction of "A Justice of the peace or III
the Superior Court. IN certain cases.
might be committed directly to the
work house. The attention Of the
court was directed To the case of My
ers Y. Stafford. ia y. c.. Pa in which
the court held That Il party conEiCtej
of a petty Inisdemeanor might De
sentenced to work on the public roads:
and also the case of State Y. Yandla,
.119 n. G., S74, which held that the
order of the commissioners of
county committing a defendant to la
Dor on the public roads was not an
additional punishment, but an incident
to the sentence imposed and author
lzel by section BIAS Of This Code. And
also to the case of Herring Y. Dixon.
122 y. c.. 425. in which n provision
n a, road law for certain counties
similar to the one in the Wake
county law, was declared to be consti-
tutional.