New-York tribune., 1909-11-30
REFORM OF CODE
Protests in Consequence of
.StcinheH Trial.
Paris. November IL.

,srEpr soafrllllAll SCRUTINY IA FRANCE atlo
.broad. French methods Of procedure
.,s rules ~ admissi bility Of evidence
-. totally different from those prevail
&c In an English speaking countries.
re apparent brutality Of the inquisi-
.,.isr ..intcrr0gatoire" Of the Judge and
-. vast amount Of evidence brought be-
-. the Jury that would be set aside as
.--slevaut IN an American court are
..srurcs most severely criticised by i'm
,.-tisI Observers. The French criminal
code Is terrible In its precision. Its de-
..cfs are due 20 its rigid, east iron in
eexiblitv its faults are glaring. but il
seems unfair 70 qualify IL as "a system
of buUdozinE" 20 use the words at
--srvted to Chief Justice PeeIe Of Wash
3-rr1r. or o. describe il as "a relic OF
bsrharism." 70 borrow the expression
sscribed % Judge Hale Of Minnesota.
Among those who are convinced of the
necessity ~ urgent reform of the French
rode ~ criminal procedure are Aristide
R-isrd. now Prime Minister; Georges
CIemenccau. recently Prime Minister.
Rsrth0u. Minister ~ Justice. Jean
Crubui. ex-minister. and many leading
members 81 the Paris bar. The French
code merely steueotyped. as IL were. the
.rate ar French law which existed AZ the
beginning n the nineteenth century. and
which sprsnE from three great sources
fpe Roman law. canon laW and Ciermanic
law
TIE code Of Napoleon. which, with Ger
tain notifications. is the code in force
to-day. made France a country Of writ
Ter Iav. and written down 10 the most
rrieiug details This makes il very diff
cut o. change few articles without
Urea king mp the whole code. because
rear.y al the articles OF the code are so
6ovsta..r5 together that they must all he
moo frG So as 70 accord with the new
rr.re.r.e T. be introduced. As Is pointed
OUT hv NJ. Jean Cruppi who for the last
ruertv wears has beer hammering away
r. the bar. iu the Chamber Of Deputies.
IN tEe senate and I'm the press u bring
sb0gt reforms iE the code. the French
parliament has always relegated 5udi-
clal reform bills % tie archives. because
i- ras .--ariably shrunk from the re-
sr0rs.r.-r ~ assuming such a radical
task ~ -r..- enactment
AS -.~- ao as 1865 Provost Paradol
pointed .s- The iniqu.ty az the Judges
summary charge 10 the jury before the
hea~-- rt -ne case and also the Judges
--.--".r.." 0r inCulsit0rIal ques-
torr- at rre prisoner. The judges pre-
fr--r-. Charge was abolished in ISL
Dong --.~ Provost ParadoTs death The
..--.--.-. -. -D~ however. srlU c0ntin-
uas ard mas r-e feature in the Sreiuheu
t-.aL t.- elected such general Genuncia-
rr-. S--.--. O. say. the ''luterrogar8ire~
IS nor authorized by the code itself. but
has grown up simply as q custom OF
p-oe.ll-.
Some twenty years ago, during the
-r.al ol Er-do. who was condemned on q
charge No murder. and guil5tneG, there
was E-.at outau-st Of Indignation
against -.- 'ir-e-roEatoire." During
lat trial tle judge Eot impatient and
aLEr .- account Of the eX-ra0rdl mary
..eF=---s= and r.oqUerce Qf The pris-
0nc-s -les 20 his terminating ques-
tons Tr- Judge, in 1T OF temper, put
t-s following question 20 tile accused:
W-. .a-- yol reply 10 my questions
smr --. oa--g5ri-aly with q Yes or
g.. Instead ~ answering with long
sa--l--s and laranguesg TO each Of my
questions sou reply with elaborate argu-
uel.s and rIealllgs. This must cease"
~ t.s F-als quietly answered: 7 an
forced -- -a =H, because every question
ru- -- -. E.a -s q '-elllsiloire '-an ad-Oit
argument t.r The prosecution. The
Elsl at -..s WAS so apparent that the
Judge la5 nothing further 10 say on this
p0.-- --.. r. -le delight of the bar
and -.. public. TLls incident praC-
t-a.v sums ul The main defect Of the
T-e-r- procedure. so srrking,y appar-
e., lr.IE the -rial OF AIme. Steinhel.
i s popular error 10 assume that
ue E---r Jaw presumes the prisoner
guilty -re 1U5Ee -s forbidden by the
c1cf t1 have any presumption either for
or against -ue prisoner. But the burden
y proof -s upon the accused 10 estab-
lsh Dis innocence while il the English
Speaking cHlurries as we al know, the
burden of PROOF is upon the prosecution
% convince the jury Of the prisoners
glit Every fragment of stray evidence.
o. the other hand. may be produced and
submit t9 the jury without the slight
ezt regard 20 its relevancy. Many
FrencL lawyers consider that, owing 70
me French mentality. this is an advan-
t~ge DO tre prisoner and enables the
5ury tl take a wider view OF the Issue put
before II.
Tho main points q the proposed re-
iorn NJ The French criminal code may be
STATED az follows: The preliminary in
Fesuga-on o. determine whether or not
crime has been committed should be
haoe by the courts of justice exclusively,
ana not, az now, on double, often con-
ficiing, lines, one investigation being
MADE hv The court and another stimuli
laneocsly ny the prefecture Of police.
-he custom ~ the "inuerroga by
ue Judge should be suppressed and re-
placed ry C-rect examina tions-in-chlef
s"l crosse examinations, conducted by
Dle prosecuting attorney and by the
counsel Tor tle defence.
~ p Del now. p French judge in q Grim
.'.e- lfla- seems o. be- doing all the pros
--Ae strong and crushing inter
''sai',' always brings a judge into
iI'minence iH France. and is a sure way
NJ 'Dlainlne promotion. BY doing away
r.Hs-r.rr.. rf.. r-~.rlsIr -rrTuae