The commercial. (Union City, Tenn.) 190?-193?, 1909-07-09

/
Was he assassinated2 Yes; he wa
hanged by the neck by men who wer
not officers of the law. Who kille
him? The evidence against the defend
ants was overwhelming. But the iur
to pass upon this evidence was improp
erly selected says the learned court, ant
the case was reversed.
/ There is nothing in the record tc
show that the Supreme Court lookeC
into the question as to whether evidence
of the guilt of the men was conclusive
that it proved the Indictment to bt
true.
The whole case went off on Judge
Jones method and manner of selecting
the jury, and upon reducing the num-
Der of the defendants peremptory chal-
lenges.
Granted that the Supreme Court is
technically correct in its contention
what then
Eight men upon trial give the defend
ants the right to 1872 peremptory chal-
lenges Then, again, if the knowledge
secured through newspapers, and the
knowledge secured by statements, are a
bar to jury service, under the limita-
tions the Supreme Court sets in this
opinion, we doubt that any man in
Obion County could serve upon this
jury. Certainly no man could be a
competent juror in this case, giving
him the ordinary experience that all
men have in life these days, unless he
were deaf dumb and blind.
Under the ruling of the Supreme
Court we can not see if in any county
there is a sensational murder such as
this, involving many people, how it is
possible to get jury at all.
The more heinous the murder, the
more killed, and the more men taking
part in the killing, the less is the chance
of getting a jury. The result of this
reasoning is that if the majority of the
people in county engaged in the bust
ness of murder, that no power under
our constitution and law, as the Su-
preme Court CONSTITUTES it, can secure
conviction because, under the courts
ruling, it would be impossible to secure
jury.
Kill, then, in big way, kill with a
big noise, spread the story of the kill
ing through the county, then go bloody
handed into court, dare that court to
select a jury under these conditions.
The decision of the Supreme Court
makes it impossible to get a jury, and
the notoriety caused by the enormity of
the crime saves your neck.
We have a night rider trial on now
at GAINESVILLE. In it there is a murder
charge.
This moment young man brings to
our desk this telegram:
Nashville, Tenn, July 81. F.
Van Hooser, a highly respected tobacco
planter of Christian County, KY. has
abandoned his farm and left for parts
unknown as the result of his son, aged
Is, having received a night rider note
telling him he must leave the county
Rather than have the boy face the
world alone, Mr. Van Hooser and fam
lily went with him.
The law, as the protector of human
life and property, seems to have col
lapsed in Christian County, Kentucky.
The law as the protector of human life
and property is dangerously near col
lapse in Obion County.
Whether the law as the protector of
human life is impotent in Memphis,
will be illustrated by the result of the
jury's verdict in the Barrett case.
Have we come to that refinement in
technicalities in the jury system where,
instead of being a defense for the law
abiding, the jury system is fortress for
the lawless? If this is true, then in
order to protect human life and prop
erty in this State will it be necessary to
use the methods that Diaz uses in Mex
leo? In that country if there is a reign
of murder and lawlessness in a terri
tory, the troops are sent there. The
ring-leaders are caught, are tried by
drum-head court martial, and are shot
by the soldiers. God forbid that the
English-speaking race of the United
States should have to come to this pass
in order to punish murderers.
But we must for the defense of our
own civilization, stop the business of