Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1906-05-12

| Down here in the Indian Terrific, " !ncs
need the Nii,, that has blood aa1 b:ncs
To H. and the next time l wont s.an7
| N its way
The point is sufficiently plain With
out elaboration 1t is the active prin-
ciple of lynch law.
The experience of the present gov
| ernor of Missouri is one in point. H@
broke up a scoundrelly ring of boob
| lers in ST. Louis and convicted its lead
ers in court. Perhaps not one person
| out of ten who are familiar with Folks
cleansing of st. Louis knows that THESE
| convictions were reversed by the SUI
| preme Missouri court. Not because
there was any lack of evidence Of their
guilt; that was clearly proved and adj
mitted, but on account of variance
between the letter of an indictment
| and an instruction OF the lower court.
| Thus the case of Senator Burton OF
Kansas convicted of receiving $500 a
| month to stand between a swindle and
/
viction was reversed, not because dl-
rect proof that he got the money and
earned" 1t was lacking, the case was
plain enough but because the indict-
ment said he got the money in Wash
ington and the evidence showed he got
1t in st. Louis. Burton has now been
4:
hopes. Why not?
Whence comes the protection, this
barrier of legal procedure between
the convicted and guilty criminal and
punishment? Mr.. George w. Algef
explains it thus: A criminal trial, he
points out, besides the sitting OF evil
dence against the accused, means also
a rigid schoolboy examination in law
of the trial judge. Whether or not
the criminal is guilty if the trial judge
has not passed perfect examination,
there must be a new trial. Continuing
he says:
The counsel for the accused pre-
nafeS, 1IlGT loilEs QeliUSi dlioi5 pSioiN
the trial, propositions of law volumln-
Gus, intricate. carefully studied, when
have some theortic or, possibly, some
practical application to the case to be
tried. When the trial comes, and after
the evidence of the witnesses has all
been taken and the judge has given
his charge to the jury, the lawyer
brings out these propositions ana
unfolds them. He says, II request tire
court further to instruct the jury as
follows He reads his first PROPOSE
ton. The judge must then decide at
once, with little opportunity for DELHI
Grafton, on the correctness and appllca-
bility of this law proposition. He must
either add it to his charge to the jury
or refuse to do so. If he refuses, the
prisoners lawyer says, Il except" and
proceeds to his next proposition, ana
then on thru the list. In case his client
is found guilty, these propositions
which were refused are argued as "er-
rors" on appeal. On the appeal in the
higher court. the testimony taken and
the proceedings of the trial are printed,
and those alleged errors" argued be-
fore Judges having the same abundant
leisure and opportunity for reflection
upon these propositions which the
lawyer enjoyed who prepared them. but
which the Judge who passed on them
at the trial did not have. The appel
late court examining solemly each of
these propositions (and there are some
times fifteen or twenty of them in
single case). finds one which should
have been charged. 1t may have been
one which, as matter of fact. the jury
would never have understood. But that
makes no difference. The guilt OF the
convicted man may be clear, but ne
gets a new trial. He keeps on getting
a new trial until the lower court judge
can pass a perfect examination on ev-
cry material proposition of law put be-
fore him on the trial, and has cor
rectly decided every squabble between
the opposing lawyers over any matter
of Imaginable substance. Then, the
law being satisfied, justice can be
done.
Getting outside those technical
points of law which few men outside
the legal profession and it might prop
erly be added a majority inside that
profession fail to fully understand the
need of the reforms in criminal law at
present being urged from high places
has long been evident. The public
favors law with "blood and bones in
it, law that may be promptly en-
forced and its penalties promptly car
ried out in cases where guilt is patent
and plainly established. The defend
ant should have every right that is
properly his but the protection of the
the public should not be forgotten. A
thief with the goods on him should not
escape because he stole in st. Louis
instead of Washington; convicted
murder should not go free because of
a clerical error and the minutfae Of
the law should not stand between men
who assail the very foundations Of So
cial organization and the penalties
provided for their crimes. Justice to
society is as necessary as justice to
the individual.
THE LOGIC OF DR.. CRAPSEYS CASE.
Not to discuss in any form s,ic utili-
ty or the absurdity of a heresy tria!
in the year 1905, not to assume any po-
sition on the merits or dement's of any
religious question that involves as