Fitzgerald enterprise. (Fitzgerald, Ga.) 1895-1912, 1908-11-03
An Unjust Criticism.

Editor Quincy of the OcilIa Star, himself a
lawyer writes, length an editorial in last weeks
Star criticising our criticism of attorneys who de-
fend notorious criminals
The editorial in the Star is too long to repro
duce but we will notice every point made by our
contemporary
The Enterprise does not object to every crlml
nal having ''fair and impartial trial'' criminal
courts would be farce under any other conditions.
The Enterprise believes that it is an attorneys
duty to defend his client, not with skill and ener-
here seems to be the parting of the ways the hair
splitting that leads ultimately to thu wide diver
gence of opinion between the editor of this paper
and the Star.
: The attorneys of whom we complain are too
apt to define the word ''skilP' to mean chicanery
and down right trickeY and ultimate fraud, per.
jury, forgery and crime; 1t is but a stet between
each degree of wrong doing.
We have in the courts of this country entirely
too much 'skill" of the kind.
We perfectly understand the principle that
every man is presumed to be innocent until he is
proven to be guilty but there are all sorts of proof
or classes of evidence. We insist that the crimi.
nal is entitled only to ''far and impartial trial "
He is not entitled to the schemes of attorneys that
must evidently result impartial trials or the mis-
carriage of justice.
We made no reference to characters whom
"a certain class or faction in the community be-
lieved to be guilty." we referred to criminals that
all factions in the community believe to be guilty
the criminals themselves, their families and CO.
partners in crimes notorious Migrants and gamblers
who are guilty of crime as often as the sun rises
and sets and menace the community One such
citizen may cost the honest tax payers of the coun-
ty thousands of dollars in money directly spent in
the investigation of the crimes to say nothing OF
the menace to property and life and the baneful
example he sets. We understand the rule that re-
quires court to assign every defendant counsel
where for any reason they fail to employ it.
There is no presumption that convictions could re-
suit swhere the defendant is too ignorant to de-
fend himself or could not employ counsel"
The editor of the Star sets up this proposition
awe do not think that a man ought to be
Convicted of any crime because of the fact that he
is man of bad character or because a portion CT
the community think that he is man of bad char
acter or because portion of the community think
that he is a man of bad character
Does he not recognize the rule that a mans
previous character is good evidence, admitted in
court as such and that every lawyer pleads it for
his client, where possible. His previous good
character has great deal to do with it in court
where strict rules must be Observed and character
has all to do with it out of court
Now as to the duty of the attorney, it may
have been said that 'tall others in the world may
tsake man and still his lawyers will stick to
him, !" but it might have been added that with
some lawyers the size for the fee has great deal
to do with the adheSveness. 1t is the honorable
attorneys duty to refuse in the interest of society
re the cases of notorious criminals particular