The Nashville globe. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1906-193?, 1911-03-03
OPPORTUNITY FOR ABUSE.
Judge Buchanan Of Supreme Court
Hands Down Able Opinion.

IN reversing Jne verdict OF the low
er court in conyicting George Waters,
of violating the age of consent law,
Judge Buchanan, of the supreme
court, took OCCASION to make some
pertinent remarks regarding the law
invoked and its chances for abuse Tor
the purpose of blackmail. The de-
PENDANT was formerly a teacher in
the Nashville city schools The
court ordered him discharged from
custody. The opinion was reported
in full by John J. Norton, court re-
porter, as follows
"The plaintiff in error was indicted
and convicted in the criminal court
of Davidson county under the. act of
1910, chapter 10, and has appealed to
this court and assigned errors.
1--WE think substantial error was
committed under the charge of the
court. Under this statute, we think,
the defendant was entitled to have
the principle charged direct by the
court that if the jury had a reason
able doubt as to the chastity, or as to
the character, of the female in ques-
tion being that of a leWd or bawd per
son that they should have found the
defendant not guilty. That was not
done in the charge of the court. The
defendant was also entitled to have
The specific principle charged to the
jury that the jury should not convict
the defendant upon the. unsupported
testimony. of the female in question.
That was not done. An effort, per
haps was made by the court TO sup
ply those two defects in the charge
by reading the statute to the jury as
a part of the charge of the court.
The statute announces both of those
principles, but that practice has been
condemned by this court in a former
decision. and we think that there is
substantial error upon the part of the
court not to have given the defendant
the benefit of these two important le-
cad principles which were vital, each
of them, to this defendant. We think
that should have been done and that
there was substantial error in the
charge of the court ON account of his
failure to do that.
But aside from this error Of the
charge of the court we think that
upon the whole evidence the female
in questions testimony was not sup
ported. We think there was no sup
port, and We think there was no such
inherent force and convincing power
in the testimony of this female in
question as warranted the jury jn
finding this. defendant guilty. The
defendant was a man of about 38
years of age he was married and
had two children; had accumulated
some property; he lived in Nashville
many years; was teacher i'm the pub
lie schools and had been for many
years. His good character was es-
tabhshed by about ten witnesses, five
of whom were men of official life in
Nashyille's prominent men. They
gave him an excellent reputation; his
general character was good. His
good character was also established
by about FIVE prominent colored men
in the city of Nashville. His good
character, to be sure, was assaulted by
the state, but by a character of testi-
mony not near so credible, we think
as that by which his character was
sustained.
Now, the inherent weakness Of
the testimony of this female in ques
ton is perfectly manifest on this rec
ord In the first place it is shown
that she had ill-will toward this de
PENDANT. 1t seems that he was g
Sunday school teacher, and that wheI
this young woman was a small cir
he stopped her from Sunday-schoo
on account of her fighting with othel
pupils in the Sunday-school, and tina
was the cause of the prosecution
The family seems to have been un1av
orable toward him, this we gather
from the record. We further gathe-
from the record that his family in