The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-08-04
REPLY OF PETTUS
ATTORNEY FOR WILLIAMS AN-
 sWERs CRITICISMS.
Does Not Question Sincerity of Cow ern0r and Board of Pardons and HeQuests the Same
 Consideration.

Huntsville, Aug. s.--(special)---A distinguished state official having criticised the Hon. Erie Pettus. for the fight he Is making to save John Will Hams, the Cullman County murderer. from the gallows, MT Pettus has made
 a full statement of the ethics involved in the case as well as what he con siders to be his duty in the matter Tt is not my purpose to fight this battle in the newspapers; l prefer the ty nor the conscientious motives which actuated the Governor and the Boaro of Pardons in their action in tnis
 matter. but it seems that the gentle man from Montgomery who so ably
 defends these authorities might have
 been sufficiently magnanimous to con
 cede the same conscientious motives to
 They. also, have sworn duty to per
 form.
 Certainly no one can justly criti-
 else ss the able juagss who UseS Hny tne aw
 plain duty. The public discussion of
 the question of law and fact involved
 of common jurisdiction, and especially
 the half yelled criticisms of the court
 itself-violates all precedent and pro.
 by the Alabama State Bar Association
 says; .,.
 The proprieties of the Judicial sta-
 judge from defending himself against
 strictures upon his official conduct For
 this reason and because such criticisms
 tend to impair confidence in attnrnaDs the aas
 should. as a rule. refrain from publish
 ed criticisms of judicial conduct.
 Code -s Of Ethics; % section 2: Also sec
 ITO say that the writ of habeas corpus should not be invoked or enter
 tained in case of this character De.
 cause, forsooth., 1t might sometimes be
 subject to abuse. Is a puerile argu-
 ment The same logic would abolish
 the. right of appeal in criminal eases
 ran remsGies. esr If M0i the ecns common law does
 not sufficiently regulate and define the
 practice in sreh cases, that is a ques-
 ton for the legislature to. consider.
 herent power to formulate practice
 In line with analogous proceedings to
 accomplish the ends of justice
 'eThe case of John Williams was tri- ed at special term of court In Gull man county under circumstances that are now matters of public record The questions of law reserved on t-.e trial were fought out in the Supreme Court and the sentence affirmed. An appli- cation for commutation of the sem tence was then made to thegovernor and board of pardons. One member of the The The other two said Let the sentence stand" and the governor refused to in-
 aInformation of the governors ac- tinn reached the attorneys for the de- fendant late Thursday afternoon and they immediately prepared to take up common law legal remedy then re-
 o@on nas a% fer esa ssf rgsp ssen existing It is true that the question of the prisoners insanity might have been suggested to the governor. as reas- A... A1-- t~k k4Nsr4 NyTN& hat case it would have been absolutely in the hands of the governor to say in what manner the insanity vel non of the prisoner should be determined. It would have been suggestion ap- pealing solely to the discretion of the executive to be received and treat l ed by him as he deemed proper. In | other words. q trial or the issue ny
 .'That the attorneys for the prisoner | preferred to have the question deter | to unwarranted criticism ~ananatins l from Montgomery. Centuries of growth l of the common law have shown that | the trial of the controverted issue Tn | a court is the best human way to de- | termine the truth and 2 trial accord | ing to law is all that has been sought | in this instance.
 flying the law Is folly when they are | acting under the law and invoking | the process of a court of competent | It is strange that in the | early history of this case no criticism was heard of the unprecedented zeal | and activity of constituted authorities in part the State. but now attorneys pursuing a plain legal remedy must be charged with resort Ing to 'subterfuge' and 'defying the
 T conceded to others that they con- scientiously did what they conceived to be their duty; demand the right of any man of high or low degree to inn case. As for the remark that It will be far from advantageous for the at torneys for the defendant 1t Is suffi- cient to say that these attorneys are seeking justice under the law for the | client and not advantage for them selves.
 In part as follows: An attorney owes entire devotion to the interest of his and defence of his cause and the exer- ton of the utmost skill and ability to the end that nothing may be done or withheld from him, save by the rules of law, legally applied. No sacrifice | or peril, even to the loss of life itself, ,an absolve from the fearless discharge 1f this duty
 stands in the shoes of his client for the the accused speaks through his advo- cate. To see that justice Is done his client. 1t is the duty of his attorney, if necessary. to go with him even to the shadow of the gallows"